Rationally Speakinghttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org
Rationally Speaking is the bi-weekly podcast of New York City Skeptics. Join host Julia Galef and guests as they explore the borderlands between reason and nonsense, likely from unlikely, and science from pseudoscience. Any topic is fair game as long as we can bring reason to bear upon it, with both a skeptical eye and a good dose of humor!
We agree with the Marquis de Condorcet, who said that in an open society we ought to devote ourselves to "the tracking down of prejudices in the hiding places where priests, the schools, the government, and all long-established institutions had gathered and protected them."Rationally Speaking was co-created with Massimo Pigliucci, is produced by Benny Pollak, and is recorded in the heart of New York City's Greenwich Village.Feeder 2.5.12(2294); Mac OS X Version 10.11 (Build 15A284) http://reinventedsoftware.com/feeder/http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rssen(c) 2010,2011 New York City Skepticsbenny@nycskeptics.org (Benny Pollak)benny@nycskeptics.org (Benny Pollak)Sun, 21 Apr 2013 11:35:08 -0400Sun, 21 Apr 2013 11:36:58 -0400http://skepticmedia.org/images/rs/itunesimage.jpgRationally Speakinghttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org
144144New York City SkepticsExploring the borderlands between reason and nonsenseskeptic, science, philosophy, skeptics, skepticism, rationalnoNew York City Skepticsrspodcast@nycskeptics.orghttp://nycskeptics.org/storage/feeds/rs.xmlnoThis episode features physicist Anthony Aguirre discussing Metaculus, the site he created to crowd-source accurate predictions about science and technology. For example, will SpaceX land on Mars by 2030?Rationally Speaking #214 - Anthony Aguirre on "Predicting the future of science and tech, with Metaculus"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-214-anthony-aguirre-on-predicting-the-future-of-science-a.html
This episode features physicist Anthony Aguirre discussing Metaculus, the site he created to crowd-source accurate predictions about science and technology. For example, will SpaceX land on Mars by 2030? Anthony and Julia discuss details such as: why it's useful to have predictions on questions like these, how to measure Metaculus' accuracy, why Anthony chose not to run it like a traditional prediction market, and how to design incentives to reward good forecasters.Sun, 5 Aug 2018 22:00:00 -05004BB1E778-4784-401B-A63D-E673643472E7NYC SkepticsThis episode features physicist Anthony Aguirre discussing Metaculus, the site he created to crowd-source accurate predictions about science and technology. For example, will SpaceX land on Mars by 2030?no50:28This episode features Professor Dean Simonton, who has spent his life quantitatively studying geniuses, from Einstein to Mozart.Rationally Speaking #213 - Dean Simonton on "The causes of scientific and artistic genius"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-213-dean-simonton-on-the-causes-of-scientific-and-artisti.html
This episode features Professor Dean Simonton, who has spent his life quantitatively studying geniuses, from Einstein to Mozart. Dean and Julia discuss his views on whether IQ is important, whether some innovations are "in the air" at given points in history, whether the "10,000 hours = mastery" theory promoted by Malcolm Gladwell is accurate, and more.Sun, 22 Jul 2018 17:00:00 -0500F990CE98-B463-462C-8FE3-886AC09C0C28NYC SkepticsThis episode features Professor Dean Simonton, who has spent his life quantitatively studying geniuses, from Einstein to Mozart.no1:06:03This episode features neuroscientist Ed Boyden discussing two inventions of his that have revolutionized neuroscience: optogenetics and expansion microscopy.Rationally Speaking #212 - Ed Boyden on "How to invent game-changing technologies"http://rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-212-ed-boyden-on-how-to-invent-game-changing-technologies.html
This episode features neuroscientist Ed Boyden discussing two inventions of his that have revolutionized neuroscience: optogenetics and expansion microscopy. Ed and Julia talk about Ed's approach to coming up with good ideas, why he prefers reading old science to new science, his big-picture plan for what he wants to solve in his career, and his take on the rationalist versus Hayekian debate over how to make important progress.Sun, 8 Jul 2018 20:00:00 -05005F9B7A33-DDC0-4481-A2FB-444171CA3FBANYC SkepticsThis episode features neuroscientist Ed Boyden discussing two inventions of his that have revolutionized neuroscience: optogenetics and expansion microscopy.no48:52This episode features physicist Sabine Hossenfelder, author of Lost in Math, arguing that fundamental physics is too enamored of "beauty" as a criterion for evaluating theories of how the universe works.Rationally Speaking #211 - Sabine Hossenfelder on "The case against beauty in physics"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-211-sabine-hossenfelder-on-the-case-against-beauty-in-phy.html
This episode features physicist Sabine Hossenfelder, author of Lost in Math, arguing that fundamental physics is too enamored of "beauty" as a criterion for evaluating theories of how the universe works. She and Julia discuss the three components of beauty (simplicity, naturalness, and elegance), why physicists think it's reasonable to put their trust in beauty, and why this might be merely a symptom of other underlying problems with physics as a discipline.Sun, 24 Jun 2018 20:00:00 -050088443841-30EB-47B9-AC95-2B105CB47FCCNYC SkepticsThis episode features physicist Sabine Hossenfelder, author of Lost in Math, arguing that fundamental physics is too enamored of "beauty" as a criterion for evaluating theories of how the universe works.no42:10This episode features Stuart Ritchie, intelligence researcher and author of the book "Intelligence: All That Matters." Stuart responds to some of the most common conceptual objections to the science of IQ testing.Rationally Speaking #210 - Stuart Ritchie on "Conceptual objections to IQ testing"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-210-stuart-ritchie-on-conceptual-objections-to-iq-testing.html
This episode features Stuart Ritchie, intelligence researcher and author of the book "Intelligence: All That Matters." Stuart responds to some of the most common conceptual objections to the science of IQ testing. Can we even define intelligence? Aren't there lots of different kinds of intelligence? How do we know the tests are measuring intelligence at all instead of something like motivation or familiarity with the style of testing? Does it undermine the meaningfulness of IQ as a metric that people can improve over time, with practice, or over generations?Sun, 10 Jun 2018 20:00:00 -0500B8D5BFA0-D625-4946-904F-4AC0C7F5A173NYC SkepticsThis episode features Stuart Ritchie, intelligence researcher and author of the book "Intelligence: All That Matters." Stuart responds to some of the most common conceptual objections to the science of IQ testing.no57:14This episode features cognitive psychologist Christopher Chabris discussing his research on "collective intelligence" and why people get so upset at companies like Facebook and OKCupid for doing experiments on their users, and whether that's fair.Rationally Speaking #209 - Christopher Chabris on "Collective intelligence & the ethics of A/B tests"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-209-christopher-chabris-on-collective-intelligence-the-et.html
This episode features cognitive psychologist Christopher Chabris discussing his research on "collective intelligence" -- why do some teams perform better than others at a wide variety of tasks? Julia discusses potential objections to the findings and how gender-related publication bias should affect our interpretation of them. In the second half of the episode, Julia and Chris discuss why people get so upset at companies like Facebook and OKCupid for doing experiments on their users, and whether that's fair.Sun, 27 May 2018 20:00:00 -0500C80FF38B-A495-44C6-BBFC-CDAFD70AE12CNYC SkepticsThis episode features cognitive psychologist Christopher Chabris discussing his research on "collective intelligence" and why people get so upset at companies like Facebook and OKCupid for doing experiments on their users, and whether that's fair.no51:54This episode features Annie Duke, former pro poker player and author of the book Thinking in Bets: Making Smarter Decisions When You Don’t Have All the Facts. Julia and Annie debate why people tend to ignore the role of luck in their decisions.Rationally Speaking #208 - Annie Duke on "Thinking in bets"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-208-annie-duke-on-thinking-in-bets.html
This episode features Annie Duke, former pro poker player and author of the book Thinking in Bets: Making Smarter Decisions When You Don't Have All the Facts. Julia and Annie debate why people tend to ignore the role of luck in their decisions, whether expressing uncertainty makes you seem weak, and how people end up engaging in "defensive decision-making," where they're not trying to make the best call so much as simply avoid being blamed for bad outcomes.Sun, 13 May 2018 16:00:00 -0500145744CB-E8A2-4BD1-977B-D10FA5333117NYC SkepticsThis episode features Annie Duke, former pro poker player and author of the book Thinking in Bets: Making Smarter Decisions When You Don’t Have All the Facts. Julia and Annie debate why people tend to ignore the role of luck in their decisions.no52:40Developmental psychologist Alison Gopnik explains why modern parenting is too goal-oriented. Alison and Julia discuss whether anything parents do matters, whether kids should go to school, and how kids learn discipline if you don't force them to do things.Rationally Speaking #207 - Alison Gopnik on "The wrong way to think about parenting, plus the downsides of modernity"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-207-alison-gopnik-on-the-wrong-way-to-think-about-parenti.html
Developmental psychologist Alison Gopnik explains why modern parenting is too goal-oriented. Alison and Julia discuss whether anything parents do matters, whether kids should go to school, and how kids learn discipline if you don't force them to do things. They also discuss Alison's reservations about Steven Pinker's book Enlightenment Now, and her concerns about potential downsides of modernity.Sun, 29 Apr 2018 20:00:00 -0500E93CB1F7-9FC1-4C5F-B3A4-93C5AA031673NYC SkepticsDevelopmental psychologist Alison Gopnik explains why modern parenting is too goal-oriented. Alison and Julia discuss whether anything parents do matters, whether kids should go to school, and how kids learn discipline if you don't force them to do thingsno1:03:12Julia and Kal Turnbull discuss the culture of the subreddit Change My View, what makes it such an oasis for reasonable discussion on the Internet, and what we've learned about what motivates people to change their minds or not.Rationally Speaking #206 - Kal Turnbull on "Change My View"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-206-kal-turnbull-on-change-my-view.html
When people argue on the internet, you never expect anyone to actually say "You know what, that's a good point, you've changed my view somewhat." But Change My View, a fast-growing subreddit founded by Kal Turnbull, is an exception to the rule. Julia and Kal discuss the culture of Change My View, what makes it such an oasis for reasonable discussion on the Internet, and what we've learned about what motivates people to change their minds or not.Sun, 15 Apr 2018 18:00:00 -050052074299-D8E4-42B4-9A47-981B5E1DDDEFNYC SkepticsJulia and Kal Turnbull discuss the culture of the subreddit Change My View, what makes it such an oasis for reasonable discussion on the Internet, and what we've learned about what motivates people to change their minds or not.no49:29This episode features economist Michael Webb, who recently co-authored a paper titled "Are ideas getting harder to find?" It demonstrates that the number of researchers it takes to produce a technological innovation has gone up dramatically over time.Rationally Speaking #205 - Michael Webb on "Are ideas getting harder to find?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-205-michael-webb-on-are-ideas-getting-harder-to-find.html
This episode features economist Michael Webb, who recently co-authored a paper titled "Are ideas getting harder to find?" It demonstrates that the number of researchers it takes to produce a technological innovation has gone up dramatically over time. Michael and Julia discuss various possible explanations for why this is happening, along with several challenges to his paper.Sun, 1 Apr 2018 22:00:00 -0500CC7AE65A-13BA-4F5F-8637-C37DA36A8172NYC SkepticsThis episode features economist Michael Webb, who recently co-authored a paper titled "Are ideas getting harder to find?" It demonstrates that the number of researchers it takes to produce a technological innovation has gone up dramatically over time.no48:38Simine Vazire is a professor of psychology, the author of the blog, "Sometimes I'm Wrong," and a major advocate for improving the field of psychology.Rationally Speaking #204 - Simine Vazire on "Reforming psychology, and self-awareness"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-204-simine-vazire-on-reforming-psychology-and-self-awaren.html
Simine Vazire is a professor of psychology, the author of the blog, "Sometimes I'm Wrong," and a major advocate for improving the field of psychology. She and Julia discuss several potential objections to Simine's goal, how to handle criticism, and Simine's psychology research on the question: How self-aware are people about the way they behave?Sun, 18 Mar 2018 22:00:00 -050049D47EDF-2309-493C-A58C-68D10D37D370NYC SkepticsSimine Vazire is a professor of psychology, the author of the blog, "Sometimes I'm Wrong," and a major advocate for improving the field of psychology.no53:00The universe has been around for billions of years, so why haven't we seen any signs of alien civilizations? This episode features physicist Stephen Webb, who describes some of the potential solutions to the puzzle.Rationally Speaking #203 - Stephen Webb on "Where is Everybody? Solutions to the Fermi Paradox."http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-203-stephen-webb-on-where-is-everybody-solutions-to-the-f.html
In 1950, the great physicist Enrico Fermi posed a question that people have been puzzling over ever since: Where is everybody? The universe has been around for billions of years, so why haven't we seen any signs of alien civilizations? This episode features physicist Stephen Webb, who describes some of the potential solutions to the puzzle. Stephen and Julia also discuss questions such as: What evidence have we gotten so far that helps us answer the Fermi problem? How do we estimate how rare/difficult it is for human-level intelligence to evolve? And why does it matter what the answer to Fermi's question is?Sun, 4 Mar 2018 19:00:00 -0500E467852A-15BA-4F03-9417-2F81C860E45ENYC SkepticsThe universe has been around for billions of years, so why haven't we seen any signs of alien civilizations? This episode features physicist Stephen Webb, who describes some of the potential solutions to the puzzle.no40:46In this episode, economist Bryan Caplan argues that the main reason getting a college degree is valuable is because of signaling, and not because college teaches you useful knowledge or skills.Rationally Speaking #202 - Bryan Caplan on "The Case Against Education"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-202-bryan-caplan-on-the-case-against-education.html
In this episode, economist Bryan Caplan argues that the main reason getting a college degree is valuable is because of signaling (i.e., it proves that you have traits that employers value, like conscientiousness and conformity), and not because college teaches you useful knowledge or skills. Julia proposes several potential challenges to Bryan's argument, and they discuss why it matters how much of education's value is signaling.Sun, 18 Feb 2018 22:00:00 -05005CAE6387-8CCC-4472-BC1A-8D1F1C6F2155NYC SkepticsIn this episode, economist Bryan Caplan argues that the main reason getting a college degree is valuable is because of signaling, and not because college teaches you useful knowledge or skills.no47:59In this episode, Ben Buchanan (postdoctoral fellow at Harvard studying cybersecurity and statecraft) explores how the escalation dilemma plays out in the realm of cybersecurity.Rationally Speaking #201 - Ben Buchanan on "The Cybersecurity Dilemma"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-201-ben-buchanan-on-the-cybersecurity-dilemma.html
The security dilemma is a classic problem in geopolitics: Often when one nation takes measures to protect itself from attack (like adding to their stockpile of missiles), other nations see that and worry it means the first nation is preparing to attack them, which leads to a dangerous feedback loop of escalation. In this episode, Ben Buchanan (postdoctoral fellow at Harvard studying cybersecurity and statecraft) explores how this dilemma plays out in the realm of cybersecurity: Why is the dilemma harder to resolve than it used to be with traditional warfare? And is there anything that might help?Sun, 04 Feb 2018 22:00:00 -050094502B8D-F34A-4FC9-A921-A46A614C2897NYC SkepticsIn this episode, Ben Buchanan (postdoctoral fellow at Harvard studying cybersecurity and statecraft) explores how the escalation dilemma plays out in the realm of cybersecurity.no44:40This episode features tech and policy journalist Timothy Lee, discussing a question that's increasingly in the spotlight: How much should tech companies be actively moderating their users' speech?Rationally Speaking #200 - Timothy Lee on "How much should tech companies moderate speech?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-200-timothy-lee-on-how-much-should-tech-companies-moderat.html
This episode features tech and policy journalist Timothy Lee, discussing a question that's increasingly in the spotlight: How much should tech companies be actively moderating their users' speech? For example, should Facebook be trying to fight fake news? Should Twitter ban bullying? Should Reddit ban subreddits that they consider hate speech? Timothy and Julia look at the question not just from the legal perspective, but also from the moral and strategic perspectives as well.Sun, 21 Jan 2018 20:00:00 -050011C033B0-09E0-4950-8D1A-6CB894EE6F3ANYC SkepticsThis episode features tech and policy journalist Timothy Lee, discussing a question that's increasingly in the spotlight: How much should tech companies be actively moderating their users' speech?no44:21This episode features Jessica Flanigan, professor of normative and applied ethics, making the case that patients should have the right to take pharmaceutical drugs without needing to get a prescription from a doctor.Rationally Speaking #199 - Jessica Flanigan on "Why people should have the right to self-medicate"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-199-jessica-flanigan-on-why-people-should-have-the-right.html
This episode features Jessica Flanigan, professor of normative and applied ethics, making the case that patients should have the right to take pharmaceutical drugs without needing to get a prescription from a doctor. Jessica and Julia discuss a series of related questions, such as: Should there be exceptions made for drugs that have negative repercussions on society as a whole? And what is the morally relevant difference between a doctor imposing treatment on someone without consent, and the government withholding treatment from someone without consent?Sun, 7 Jan 2018 20:00:00 -0500FBA7237F-13EF-4099-9B04-CF4EB9BC307DNYC SkepticsThis episode features Jessica Flanigan, professor of normative and applied ethics, making the case that patients should have the right to take pharmaceutical drugs without needing to get a prescription from a doctor.no42:46In this episode, economist Timur Kuran explains the ubiquitous phenomenon of "preference falsification" -- in which people claim to support something publicly even though they don't support it privately -- and describes its harmful effects on society.Rationally Speaking #198 - Timur Kuran on "Private Truths and Public Lies"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-198-timur-kuran-on-private-truths-and-public-lies.html
In this episode, economist Timur Kuran explains the ubiquitous phenomenon of "preference falsification" -- in which people claim to support something publicly even though they don't support it privately -- and describes its harmful effects on society. He and Julia explore questions like: Is preference falsification all bad? Are there ways to reduce it? And how much has the Internet changed the dynamics around preference falsification?Sun, 10 Dec 2017 20:00:00 -0500E6734537-50C5-400E-A75E-422690701F4ENYC SkepticsIn this episode, economist Timur Kuran explains the ubiquitous phenomenon of "preference falsification" -- in which people claim to support something publicly even though they don't support it privately -- and describes its harmful effects on society.no59:08In this episode Julia talks with Doug Hubbard, author of How to Measure Anything, about why people so often believe things are impossible to quantify like "innovation" or "quality of life."Rationally Speaking #197 - Doug Hubbard on "Why people think some things can’t be quantified (and why they’re wrong)"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-197-doug-hubbard-on-why-people-think-some-things-cant-be.html
In this episode Julia talks with Doug Hubbard, author of How to Measure Anything, about why people so often believe things are impossible to quantify like "innovation" or "quality of life." For example, because people often have a deep misunderstanding of the meaning of probability. Or because they're reluctant to violate "sacred taboos" by putting a number on something like the value of human life. Or because it feels vulgar to "reduce" important things to a number. Doug explains how he responds to these objections and others.Sun, 12 Nov 2017 20:00:00 -050048828E9C-14C6-44EA-A9BF-F9223A8364A2NYC SkepticsIn this episode Julia talks with Doug Hubbard, author of How to Measure Anything, about why people so often believe things are impossible to quantify like "innovation" or "quality of life."no53:08Philosopher Eric Schwitzgebel returns to the show to explore several related questions: His taxonomy of the three different styles of thinker -- "Truth," "Dare," and "Wonder" -- and whether one of them is better than the others.Rationally Speaking #196 - Eric Schwitzgebel on "Weird ideas and opaque minds"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-196-eric-schwitzgebel-on-weird-ideas-and-opaque-minds.html
Philosopher Eric Schwitzgebel returns to the show to explore several related questions: His taxonomy of the three different styles of thinker -- "Truth," "Dare," and "Wonder" -- and whether one of them is better than the others. His case for why it's bad to interpret people "charitably." And his seemingly paradoxical claim that we are frequently wrong about our own conscious experience.Sun, 29 Oct 2017 20:00:00 -0500588E7104-D5FD-4BA7-A99E-2C4CFA587CAANYC SkepticsPhilosopher Eric Schwitzgebel returns to the show to explore several related questions: His taxonomy of the three different styles of thinker -- "Truth," "Dare," and "Wonder" -- and whether one of them is better than the others.no1:05:45This episode features Zach Weinersmith, creator of the philosophical webcomic Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, and the co-author (with his wife Kelly Weinersmith) of the new book Soonish: 10 Emerging Technologies That'll Improve and/or Ruin Everythings.Rationally Speaking #195 - Zach Weinersmith on "Emerging technologies that'll improve and/or ruin everything"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-195-zach-weinersmith-on-emerging-technologies-thatll-impr.html
This episode features Zach Weinersmith, creator of the philosophical webcomic Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, and the co-author (with his wife Kelly Weinersmith) of the new book Soonish: 10 Emerging Technologies That'll Improve and/or Ruin Everything. Julia and Zach talk about which new technology is the most likely to happen, which would be most transformative, and which would pose the most risk to the world. Also, has our society become too risk-averse? And what are the main bottlenecks to technological development?Sun, 15 Oct 2017 16:00:00 -0500269A8380-57E1-44D3-9F32-0B226B4D061FNYC SkepticsThis episode features Zach Weinersmith, creator of the philosophical webcomic Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, and the co-author (with his wife Kelly Weinersmith) of the new book Soonish: 10 Emerging Technologies That'll Improve and/or Ruin Everythings.no50:07This episode features bestselling author Robert Wright making the case for why Buddhism was right about human nature: its diagnosis that our suffering is mainly due to a failure to see reality clearly.Rationally Speaking #194 - Robert Wright on "Why Buddhism is True"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-194-robert-wright-on-why-buddhism-is-true.html
This episode features bestselling author Robert Wright making the case for why Buddhism was right about human nature: its diagnosis that our suffering is mainly due to a failure to see reality clearly, and its prescription that meditation can help us see more clearly. Robert and Julia discuss whether it's suspicious that a religion turned out to be "right" about human nature, what it means for emotions to be true or false, and whether there are downsides to enlightenment.Sun, 01 Oct 2017 20:00:00 -05009CC2C284-B722-4C0C-9EEE-500341F4E1D5NYC SkepticsThis episode features bestselling author Robert Wright making the case for why Buddhism was right about human nature: its diagnosis that our suffering is mainly due to a failure to see reality clearly.no50:33This episode features neuroscientist and computer scientist Eric Jonas, discussing his provocative paper titled "Could a Neuroscientist Understand a Microprocessor?" in which he applied state-of-the-art neuroscience tools to a computer chip.Rationally Speaking #193 - Eric Jonas on "Could a neuroscientist understand a microprocessor?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-193-eric-jonas-on-could-a-neuroscientist-understand-a-mic.html
The field of neuroscience has been collecting more and more data, and developing increasingly advanced technological tools in its race to understand how the brain works. But can those data and tools ever yield true understanding? This episode features neuroscientist and computer scientist Eric Jonas, discussing his provocative paper titled "Could a Neuroscientist Understand a Microprocessor?" in which he applied state-of-the-art neuroscience tools, like lesion analysis, to a computer chip. By applying neuroscience's tools to a system that humans fully understand (because we built it from scratch), he was able to reveal how surprisingly uninformative those tools actually are. Julia and Eric also discuss the related question: what kind of tools *would* we need to really understand the brain?Sun, 17 Sep 2017 20:00:00 -0500CF0A1EFA-D893-42F2-9071-D2A9951D5995NYC SkepticsThis episode features neuroscientist and computer scientist Eric Jonas, discussing his provocative paper titled "Could a Neuroscientist Understand a Microprocessor?" in which he applied state-of-the-art neuroscience tools to a computer chip.no1:04:37This episode features science journalist Jesse Singal, who argues that the Implicit Associations Test (IAT) has been massively overhyped, and that in fact there's little evidence that it's measuring real-life bias.Rationally Speaking #192 - Jesse Singal on “The problems with implicit bias tests”http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-192-jesse-singal-on-the-problems-with-implicit-bias-tests.html
You may have heard of the Implicit Associations Test (IAT) -- one of the most famous instruments from social psychology, it's frequently cited as evidence that most people harbor implicit racism or sexism, even if they aren't aware of it. This episode features science journalist Jesse Singal, who argues that the IAT has been massively overhyped, and that in fact there's little evidence that it's measuring real-life bias. Jesse and Julia discuss how to interpret the IAT, why it became so popular, and why it's still likely that implicit bias is real, even if the IAT isn't capturing it.Sun, 03 Sep 2017 18:00:00 -0500BBF1C72A-386F-4965-A897-C5854CF2BCD6NYC SkepticsThis episode features science journalist Jesse Singal, who argues that the Implicit Associations Test (IAT) has been massively overhyped, and that in fact there's little evidence that it's measuring real-life bias.no51:47Seth Stephens-Davidowitz and Julia discuss the insights new research gives us into which parts of the USA are more racist, what kinds of strategies reduce racism, and whether the internet is making political polarization worse.Rationally Speaking #191 - Seth Stephens-Davidowitz on "What the internet can tell us about human nature" (Fixed)http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-191-seth-stephens-davidowitz-on-what-the-internet-can-tel.html
There are a lot of sensitive topics about human nature that would be interesting to study, such as people's sexual behavior, or how racist people really are. Researchers studying those questions have always faced the problem that we tend to lie on surveys -- but we don't lie to Google. This episode features Seth Stephens-Davidowitz, economist and data scientist, and author of the book Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Can Tell Us About Who We Really Are. Seth and Julia discuss the insights new research gives us into which parts of the USA are more racist, what kinds of strategies reduce racism, whether the internet is making political polarization worse, and the sexual fetishes and insecurities people will only admit to their search engine.Sun, 20 Aug 2017 22:00:00 -05007E62390A-3872-4789-A188-75FD6EFF64D6NYC SkepticsSeth Stephens-Davidowitz and Julia discuss the insights new research gives us into which parts of the USA are more racist, what kinds of strategies reduce racism, and whether the internet is making political polarization worse.no59:21This episode features philosopher Amanda Askell, who (though not religious herself) argues that it's much trickier to rebut Pascal's Wager than most people think.Rationally Speaking #190 - Amanda Askell on "Pascal's Wager and other low risks with high stakes"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-190-amanda-askell-on-pascals-wager-and-other-low-risks-wi.html
You've probably heard of Pascal's Wager: That it's rational to believe in God, because if you're wrong it's no big deal, but if you're right then the payoff is huge. This episode features philosopher Amanda Askell, who (though not religious herself) argues that it's much trickier to rebut Pascal's Wager than most people think. Amanda and Julia also discuss how to handle other decisions where a risk has very low probability but would matter a lot if it came true -- should you round them down to zero? Does it matter how measurable the risk is? And should you take into account the chance you're being scammed?Sun, 6 Aug 2017 18:00:00 -0500435BF640-A8F7-4205-86BA-22D0E4E5BBBCNYC SkepticsThis episode features philosopher Amanda Askell, who (though not religious herself) argues that it's much trickier to rebut Pascal's Wager than most people think.no46:29In this episode Julia sits down with neuroscientist and obesity researcher Stephan Guyenet, to talk about what scientists know so far about the causes of obesity, and in particular the brain's role in regulating weight gain.Rationally Speaking #189 - Stephan Guyenet on "What causes obesity?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-189-stephan-guyenet-on-what-causes-obesity.html
In this episode Julia sits down with neuroscientist and obesity researcher Stephan Guyenet, to talk about what scientists know so far about the causes of obesity, and in particular the brain's role in regulating weight gain. Julia and Stephan cover questions such as: Why did obesity start to increase in the United States in the latter half of the 20th century? Does the body have a "set point" of fat that it tries to defend, and what affects those set points? Are low-carb diets more effective for weight loss than low-fat diets, and if so, what explains the difference?Sun, 23 Jul 2017 18:00:00 -0500CEBF257C-3FCE-41E8-85C9-BD7D845E1FBENYC SkepticsIn this episode Julia sits down with neuroscientist and obesity researcher Stephan Guyenet, to talk about what scientists know so far about the causes of obesity, and in particular the brain's role in regulating weight gain.no1:06:49In this episode, recorded live at the Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism, Julia interviews evolutionary psychologist Rob Kurzban, author of "Why Everyone (Else) is a Hypocrite."Rationally Speaking #188 - Robert Kurzban on "Being strategically wrong"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-188-robert-kurzban-on-being-strategically-wrong.html
In this episode, recorded live at the Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism, Julia interviews evolutionary psychologist Rob Kurzban, author of "Why Everyone (Else) is a Hypocrite." Rob describes the "modular mind" hypothesis, and how it explains hypocrisy, self-deception, and other seemingly irrational features of human nature. Rob and Julia argue about how useful these kinds of "strategic wrongness" really are.Sun, 9 Jul 2017 12:00:00 -05005AC7FAB7-A176-4F92-A6E0-16BAE14F2104NYC SkepticsIn this episode, recorded live at the Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism, Julia interviews evolutionary psychologist Rob Kurzban, author of "Why Everyone (Else) is a Hypocrite."no45:48This episode features psychologist Jason Weeden, arguing that self-interest is a much bigger determinant of voter behavior than most political scientists think it is.Rationally Speaking #187 - Jason Weeden on "Do people vote based on self-interest?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-187-jason-weeden-on-do-people-vote-based-on-self-interest.html
What determines which policies a person votes for? Is it their personality, their upbringing, blind loyalty to their political party? Or is it self-interest -- people voting for policies that will benefit themselves and the groups they belong to? This episode features psychologist Jason Weeden, arguing that self-interest is a much bigger determinant of voter behavior than most political scientists think it is. Jason and Julia talk about why researchers disagree over this question, and what "self-interest" even means.Sun, 25 Jun 2017 22:00:00 -0500DA0174C4-9D71-4CC5-BE5E-C7EA22AF25E8NYC SkepticsThis episode features psychologist Jason Weeden, arguing that self-interest is a much bigger determinant of voter behavior than most political scientists think it is.no1:02:16Humans have an innate urge to reach for explanations of the world around us. This episode features psychologist and philosopher Tania Lombrozo, discussing her research on what purpose explanation serves.Rationally Speaking #186 - Tania Lombrozo on "Why we evolved the urge to explain"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-186-tania-lombrozo-on-why-we-evolved-the-urge-to-explain.html
Humans have an innate urge to reach for explanations of the world around us. For example, "What caused this tragedy?" or "Why are some people successful?" This episode features psychologist and philosopher Tania Lombrozo, discussing her research on what purpose explanation serves -- i.e., why it helps us more than our brains just running prediction algorithms. Tania and Julia also discuss whether simple explanations are more likely to be true, and why we're drawn to teleological explanations (e.g., "Why does the sun shine? So that plants can grow.")Sun, 11 Jun 2017 18:00:00 -05005EA4BBD6-B9A7-4712-A476-1EA8EBE82536NYC SkepticsHumans have an innate urge to reach for explanations of the world around us. This episode features psychologist and philosopher Tania Lombrozo, discussing her research on what purpose explanation serves.no1:08:33Julia talks with political scientist Hans Noel about why the Democrats became the party of liberalism and the Republicans the party of conservatism.Rationally Speaking #185 - Hans Noel on "The role of ideology in politics"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-185-hans-noel-on-the-role-of-ideology-in-politics.html
We're used to conflating political parties (Republican and Democrat) with political ideologies (conservative and liberal), but the two were very distinct only a few decades ago. In this episode of Rationally Speaking, Julia talks with political scientist Hans Noel about why the Democrats became the party of liberalism and the Republicans the party of conservatism, whether voters are hypocrites in the way they apply their ostensible ideology, and whether politicians are motivated by ideals or just self-interest.Sun, 28 May 2017 18:00:00 -050070BD5A22-1B1A-4CD8-87D5-0987D8F9A080NYC SkepticsJulia talks with political scientist Hans Noel about why the Democrats became the party of liberalism and the Republicans the party of conservatism.no53:27This episode features economic historian Gregory Clark, author of A Farewell to Alms and one of the leading scholars of the industrial revolution.Rationally Speaking #184 - Gregory Clark on "What caused the industrial revolution?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-184-gregory-clark-on-what-caused-the-industrial-revolutio.html
Nothing changed the course of human history as much as the industrial revolution. Yet its cause is a mystery: Why did it occur in the late 1700s, and not sooner (or later)? Why did it occur in Britain, a relatively small and geographically isolated country, and not somewhere much bigger like China, or elsewhere in Northern Europe like the Netherlands? This episode features economic historian Gregory Clark, author of A Farewell to Alms and one of the leading scholars of the industrial revolution. Greg and Julia explore different theories, as well as the epistemological challenges of answering this kind of causal question about history.Sun, 14 May 2017 18:00:00 -05007F5B586D-7B12-4332-BE1E-EF40A2E73E7DNYC SkepticsThis episode features economic historian Gregory Clark, author of A Farewell to Alms and one of the leading scholars of the industrial revolution.no1:06:17In this episode, philosopher L. A. Paul and Julia discuss real life examples of transformative experiences -- such as having children -- and debate how to deal with them.Rationally Speaking #183 - L. A. Paul on "Transformative Experiences"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-183-l-a-paul-on-transformative-experiences.html
What if you had the opportunity to become a vampire, irreversibly -- and everyone you knew who had become one said "It's utterly indescribable." Would you take the leap, not knowing what it would feel like, or how it would change your personality and values? That's an example of what philosopher L. A. Paul calls a "transformative experience," one that's especially hard to choose (or forgo) rationally, because of how unknowable it is and how it changes your very preferences. In this episode, she and Julia discuss real life examples of transformative experiences -- such as having children -- and debate how to deal with them. Sun, 30 Apr 2017 18:00:00 -05005095822C-7F29-4278-B041-DDEA6BA75102NYC SkepticsIn this episode, philosopher L. A. Paul and Julia discuss real life examples of transformative experiences -- such as having children -- and debate how to deal with them.no52:36This episode features mathematician and social entrepreneur Spencer Greenberg, talking about how he's taking advantage of the Internet to improve the research process.Rationally Speaking #182 - Spencer Greenberg on "How online research can be faster, better, and more useful"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-182-spencer-greenberg-on-how-online-research-can-be-faste.html
This episode features mathematician and social entrepreneur Spencer Greenberg, talking about how he's taking advantage of the Internet to improve the research process. Spencer and Julia explore topics such as: how the meaning of your research can change dramatically when you ask people *why* they gave the answers they did on your survey, how the sheer speed of online research can help us solve the p-hacking problem, and how to incentivize scientists to share their data and methods.Sun, 16 Apr 2017 18:00:00 -05004CF7148B-1644-4A11-AED0-F5893D5DB4A9NYC SkepticsThis episode features mathematician and social entrepreneur Spencer Greenberg, talking about how he's taking advantage of the Internet to improve the research process.no52:07Julia and William MacAskill discuss "moral uncertainty" and how to take multiple moral systems into account when making a decision, and how to deal with "absolutist" theories that insist some actions have infinite badness, like lying.Rationally Speaking #181 - William MacAskill on "Moral Uncertainty"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-181-william-macaskill-on-moral-uncertainty.html
This episode introduces "moral uncertainty," the idea that you shouldn't be overly confident in your moral judgments -- like whether it's okay to eat meat, for example, or whether it's okay to abort a baby. The episode's guest is Will MacAskill, a founder of the effective altruism movement and Oxford professor of philosophy. Julia and Will discuss how to take multiple moral systems into account when making a decision, and how to deal with "absolutist" theories that insist some actions have infinite badness, like lying.Sun, 02 Apr 2017 09:30:00 -05005DB24A19-606B-4D9C-8964-FC40E02AA85ENYC SkepticsJulia and William MacAskill discuss "moral uncertainty" and how to take multiple moral systems into account when making a decision, and how to deal with "absolutist" theories that insist some actions have infinite badness, like lying.no54:16Julia talks with economics and public policy expert David Roodman about the "Worm Wars" in social science -- the debate over whether deworming pills are an effective way to fight poverty.Rationally Speaking #180 - David Roodman on "The Worm Wars"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-180-david-roodman-on-the-worm-wars.html
In this episode of Rationally Speaking, Julia talks with economics and public policy expert David Roodman about the "Worm Wars" in social science -- the debate over whether deworming pills are an effective way to fight poverty. Along the way they discuss how to analyze a study, the differences between economists and epidemiologists, and how to make high stakes decisions when all your evidence is flawed.Sun, 19 Mar 2017 20:00:00 -050099B7E66F-346B-4520-82D5-7D94160DA576NYC SkepticsJulia talks with economics and public policy expert David Roodman about the "Worm Wars" in social science -- the debate over whether deworming pills are an effective way to fight poverty.no48:00This episode features Harvard economist Dani Rodrik, talking about the epistemology of economics: Are there any general "laws" of economics that we can be really confident in? Do economists discard models if the data doesn't support them?Rationally Speaking #179 - Dani Rodrik on "Is economics more art or science?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-179-dani-rodrik-on-is-economics-more-art-or-science.html
This episode features Harvard economist Dani Rodrik, talking about the epistemology of economics: Are there any general "laws" of economics that we can be really confident in? Do economists discard models if the data doesn't support them? And why do economists disagree with each other?Sun, 5 Mar 2017 20:00:00 -050085EFB921-DA15-46BD-A3F6-A81AB825455CNYC SkepticsThis episode features Harvard economist Dani Rodrik, talking about the epistemology of economics: Are there any general "laws" of economics that we can be really confident in? Do economists discard models if the data doesn't support them?no48:44Julia and Tim Urban explore one of their common interests: the tension between the rational and irrational aspects of human nature. Is there any value in the "irrational" parts of us? And can recognizing that tension help us live better?Rationally Speaking #178 - Tim Urban on "Trying to live well, as semi-rational animals"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-178-tim-urban-on-trying-to-live-well-as-semi-rational-ani.html
This episode features Tim Urban, author of popular longform illustrated blog Wait But Why. Julia and Tim explore one of their common interests: the tension between the rational and irrational aspects of human nature. Is there any value in the "irrational" parts of us (such as Tim's colorfully named "instant gratification monkey" and "social approval mammoth")? And can recognizing that tension help us live better -- or are we stuck struggling between our animal and rational selves?Sun, 19 Feb 2017 20:00:00 -0500FD85907F-2D50-4164-87F3-71DC7C8964F1NYC SkepticsJulia and Tim Urban explore one of their common interests: the tension between the rational and irrational aspects of human nature. Is there any value in the "irrational" parts of us? And can recognizing that tension help us live better?no50:16Journalist Dylan Matthews, who donated his kidney last year, and Julia discuss the clever design of "donor chains," how we should evaluate the science about whether kidney donation is safe, and whether we have an ethical obligation to donate.Rationally Speaking #177 - Dylan Matthews on "The science and ethics of kidney donation"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-177-dylan-matthews-on-the-science-and-ethics-of-kidney-do.html
If you're a healthy adult, should you donate one of your kidneys to a stranger? This episode features journalist Dylan Matthews, who donated his kidney last year. He and Julia discuss the clever design of "donor chains," how we should evaluate the science about whether kidney donation is safe, and whether we have an ethical obligation to donate.Sun, 5 Feb 2017 16:00:00 -0500CC3A701B-2443-4C8B-B519-47D214CE24B8NYC SkepticsJournalist Dylan Matthews, who donated his kidney last year, and Julia discuss the clever design of "donor chains," how we should evaluate the science about whether kidney donation is safe, and whether we have an ethical obligation to donate.no44:53Julia chats with professor Jason Brennan, author of the book "Against Democracy," about his case for why democracy is flawed -- philosophically, morally, and empirically.Rationally Speaking #176 - Jason Brennan on "Against democracy"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-176-jason-brennan-on-against-democracy.html
Churchill famously called democracy "the worst system of government, except for all the others that have been tried." Could we do better? On this episode of Rationally Speaking, Julia chats with professor Jason Brennan, author of the book "Against Democracy," about his case for why democracy is flawed -- philosophically, morally, and empirically.Sun, 22 Jan 2017 16:00:00 -05003A06D93F-477B-4DC9-9D96-CA7882D5D0A6NYC SkepticsJulia chats with professor Jason Brennan, author of the book "Against Democracy," about his case for why democracy is flawed -- philosophically, morally, and empirically.no51:32Professor Chris Blattman has run some well-designed randomized controlled trials exploring low-paying factories (which some might call "sweatshops"), and he discusses what surprised him and how he's updated his views from his research.Rationally Speaking #175 - Chris Blattman on "Do sweatshops reduce poverty?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-175-chris-blattman-on-do-sweatshops-reduce-poverty.html
This episode explores the economics and ethics of low-paying factories (which some might call "sweatshops") in Ethiopia. Do they make their workers better off, relative to those people's outside options? Professor Chris Blattman has run some well-designed randomized controlled trials exploring this question, and he discusses what surprised him and how he's updated his views from his research. Julia and Chris also discuss an innovative program to reduce crime in Liberia using cognitive behavioral therapy.Sun, 8 Jan 2017 16:00:00 -0500BAE8868F-B30D-46BA-A785-22CB378B73F0NYC SkepticsProfessor Chris Blattman has run some well-designed randomized controlled trials exploring low-paying factories (which some might call "sweatshops"), and he discusses what surprised him and how he's updated his views from his research.no57:38John Ioannidis and Julia discuss how Evidence-Based Medicine has been "hijacked," by whom, and what do do about it.Rationally Speaking #174 - John Ioannidis on "What happened to Evidence-based medicine?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-174-john-ioannidis-on-what-happened-to-evidence-based-med.html
Over the last two decades, the Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) movement has transformed medical science, pushing doctors to rely less on intuition or "common wisdom" in choosing treatments, and more on evidence from studies. Sounds great -- but has EBM become a victim of its own success? This episode features John Ioannidis, Stanford professor of medicine, health and policy, and statistics, and author of the famous paper, "Why Most Published Research Findings are False." John and Julia discuss how EBM has been "hijacked," by whom, and what do do about it.Sun, 11 Dec 2016 16:00:00 -0500D4800FBE-2A6F-4F83-94D0-A6694084D167NYC SkepticsJohn Ioannidis and Julia discuss how Evidence-Based Medicine has been "hijacked," by whom, and what do do about it.no45:55Julia talks with political scientist Brendan Nyhan about Trump's surprising win in the 2016 presidential election. Were the polls and models wrong? If so, why? How surprised should we have been by Trump's win? And why didn't the markets react badly to it?Rationally Speaking #173 - Brendan Nyhan on "What can we learn from the election?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-173-brendan-nyhan-on-what-can-we-learn-from-the-election.html
Since Trump's surprising win in the 2016 presidential election, there's been a flurry of discussion about why things turned out this way. But which explanations are well-supported, and which are wrong (or simply rationalizations)? This episode features political scientist Brendan Nyhan, who talks with Julia about questions like: Were the polls and models wrong? If so, why? How surprised should we have been by Trump's win? And why didn't the markets react badly to it?Sun, 27 Nov 2016 16:00:00 -0500BD46C51C-24AC-4F12-9AD6-A8689FFB0FCANYC SkepticsJulia talks with political scientist Brendan Nyhan about Trump's surprising win in the 2016 presidential election. Were the polls and models wrong? If so, why? How surprised should we have been by Trump's win? And why didn't the markets react badly to it?no39:16This episode features Brian Nosek, a professor of psychology and founder of the Center for Open Science. He and Julia discuss what openness means, some clever approaches to boosting openness, and whether openness could have any downsides.Rationally Speaking #172 - Brian Nosek on "Why science needs openness"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-172-brian-nosek-on-why-science-needs-openness.html
There's a growing anxiety about the quality of scientific research, as a depressingly large fraction of articles fail to replicate. Could "openness" solve that problem? This episode features Brian Nosek, a professor of psychology and founder of the Center for Open Science. He and Julia discuss what openness means, some clever approaches to boosting openness, and whether openness could have any downsides (for example, in the cases of peer review or data sharing).Sun, 13 Nov 2016 16:00:00 -05004D4A6699-530D-4006-9DE3-D046DC8A0FFCNYC SkepticsThis episode features Brian Nosek, a professor of psychology and founder of the Center for Open Science. He and Julia discuss what openness means, some clever approaches to boosting openness, and whether openness could have any downsides.no48:13Julia and professor Scott Aaronson explores the unorthodox idea of "swapping" your vote with someone in a swing state who was going to vote for a third party candidate.Rationally Speaking #171 - Scott Aaronson on "The ethics and strategy of vote trading"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-171-scott-aaronson-on-the-ethics-and-strategy-of-vote-tra.html
It can be pretty frustrating to live in a "safe" state during national elections, where the chance your vote will affect the overall results is practically zero. This episode, with professor Scott Aaronson, explores an unorthodox solution to the problem: "swapping" your vote with someone in a swing state who was going to vote for a third party candidate. Scott and Julia explore the game theory of vote swapping, and whether there are any ethical problems with it.Sun, 30 Oct 2016 18:00:00 -050032B95BE7-12E3-4017-9960-03481BEB7A82NYC SkepticsJulia and professor Scott Aaronson explores the unorthodox idea of "swapping" your vote with someone in a swing state who was going to vote for a third party candidate.no55:34How did "social justice" come to mean what it does today? Will Wilkinson and Julia discuss the libertarian reaction to social justice, whether or not social justice is a zero-sum game, and how the Internet exacerbates conflicts over social justice.Rationally Speaking #170 - Will Wilkinson on "Social justice and political philosophy"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-170-will-wilkinson-on-social-justice-and-political-philos.html
How did "social justice" come to mean what it does today? This episode features a chat with Will Wilkinson, a writer, political philosopher, and vice president of policy for the Niskanen Institute. Will and Julia discuss the libertarian reaction to social justice, whether or not social justice is a zero-sum game, and how the Internet exacerbates conflicts over social justice.Sun, 16 Oct 2016 18:00:00 -05005B825714-76C8-4CDF-B244-D038EE667F84NYC SkepticsHow did "social justice" come to mean what it does today? Will Wilkinson and Julia discuss the libertarian reaction to social justice, whether or not social justice is a zero-sum game, and how the Internet exacerbates conflicts over social justice.no50:27What can we do now to affect whether humanity is still around in 1000 years (and what life will be like then)? In this episode, Julia talks with Owen Cotton-Barratt, a mathematician at Oxford's Future of Humanity Institute.Rationally Speaking #169 - Owen Cotton-Barratt on "Thinking About Humanity's Far Future"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-169-owen-cotton-barratt-on-thinking-about-humanitys-far-f.html
What can we do now to affect whether humanity is still around in 1000 years (and what life will be like then)? In this episode, Julia talks with Owen Cotton-Barratt, a mathematician at Oxford's Future of Humanity Institute. They cover questions like: Given our poor track record of forecasting, is there any point to speculating about the far future? And is it rational to prioritize current people over future people? Sun, 2 Oct 2016 12:00:00 -0500311F1728-4B12-48CE-9289-FC98B9638ADDNYC SkepticsWhat can we do now to affect whether humanity is still around in 1000 years (and what life will be like then)? In this episode, Julia talks with Owen Cotton-Barratt, a mathematician at Oxford's Future of Humanity Institute.no49:36Don Moore and Julia discuss the various forms of overconfidence, whether its upsides are big enough to outweigh its downsides, and what people mean when they insist "I think things are better than they really are."Rationally Speaking #168 - Don Moore on "Overconfidence"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-168-don-moore-on-overconfidence.html
This episode features a chat with Don Moore, professor of management of organizations at the University of California Berkeley's Haas School of Business, and an expert in overconfidence. Don and Julia discuss the various forms of overconfidence, whether its upsides are big enough to outweigh its downsides, and what people mean when they insist "I think things are better than they really are."Sun, 18 Sep 2016 12:00:00 -0500FDC98E92-9992-4E62-B8ED-96AC450DA4CCNYC SkepticsDon Moore and Julia discuss the various forms of overconfidence, whether its upsides are big enough to outweigh its downsides, and what people mean when they insist "I think things are better than they really are."no47:18In this episode, Julia talks with complexity scientist Samuel Arbesman, about his new book Overcomplicated: Technology at the Limits of Comprehension, why unprecedented levels of complexity might be dangerous, and what we should do about it.Rationally Speaking #167 - Samuel Arbesman on "Why technology is becoming too complex"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-167-samuel-arbesman-on-why-technology-is-becoming-too-com.html
As the technology we rely on every day becomes increasingly sophisticated, it's getting to the point where it's too complicated to understand -- not just for individual users, but for any human at all. In this episode, Julia talks with complexity scientist Samuel Arbesman, about his new book Overcomplicated: Technology at the Limits of Comprehension, why these unprecedented levels of complexity might be dangerous, and what we should do about it.Sun, 04 Sep 2016 12:00:00 -0500DB7335B7-6803-4AB0-A15A-C863299128DDNYC SkepticsIn this episode, Julia talks with complexity scientist Samuel Arbesman, about his new book Overcomplicated: Technology at the Limits of Comprehension, why unprecedented levels of complexity might be dangerous, and what we should do about it.no50:48What role should "common sense" play in evaluating new theories? This episode features a discussion with philosopher Eric Schwitzgebel on his theory of "Crazyism," that we should expect the truth to be at least a little bit crazy.Rationally Speaking #166 - Eric Schwitzgebel on "Why you should expect the truth to be crazy"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-166-eric-schwitzgebel-on-why-you-should-expect-the-truth.html
Some theories violate common sense so wildly that you want to just reject them out of hand. For example, "The United States is conscious," or "The most moral act would be to replace all living beings with an orgasmic blob." On the other hand, many theories in physics that sounded similarly crazy turned out to be very well-supported (think of quantum theory, or relativity). So what role should "common sense" play in evaluating new theories? This episode features a discussion with philosopher Eric Schwitzgebel on his theory of "Crazyism," that we should expect the truth to be at least a little bit crazy.Sun, 21 Aug 2016 12:00:00 -050025EE6D8C-E87D-41D9-A79F-6CDBA9529585NYC SkepticsWhat role should "common sense" play in evaluating new theories? This episode features a discussion with philosopher Eric Schwitzgebel on his theory of "Crazyism," that we should expect the truth to be at least a little bit crazy.no53:36Julia chats with professor of economics Robert Frank about his latest book, Success and Luck: The Myth of the Modern Meritocracy. Why do we discount the role of luck in success? And would acknowledging luck's importance sap our motivation to try?Rationally Speaking #165 - Robert Frank on "Success and Luck"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-165-robert-frank-on-success-and-luck.html
If someone asks you, "What caused your success (in finance, your career, etc.)?" what probably comes to mind for you is a story about how you worked hard and made smart choices. Which is likely true -- but what you don't see are all the people who also worked hard and made smart choices, but didn't succeed because luck wasn't on their side.
In this episode, Julia chats with professor of economics Robert Frank about his latest book, Success and Luck: The Myth of the Modern Meritocracy. They explore questions like: Why do we discount the role of luck in success? Has luck become more important in recent years? And would acknowledging luck's importance sap our motivation to try?Sun, 07 Aug 2016 12:00:00 -05001FAE9242-4B62-4B03-B755-2DC0B75C309FNYC SkepticsJulia chats with professor of economics Robert Frank about his latest book, Success and Luck: The Myth of the Modern Meritocracy. Why do we discount the role of luck in success? And would acknowledging luck's importance sap our motivation to try?no56:12Has science gotten slower over the years? What unstated assumptions are shaping our research without us even realizing it? Julia talks with sociologist of science James Evans, who investigates questions like these using some clever data mining.Rationally Speaking #164 - James Evans on "Using meta-knowledge to learn how science works"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-164-james-evans-on-using-meta-knowledge-to-learn-how-scie.html
Has science gotten slower over the years? Does the proliferation of jargon make it harder for scientists to collaborate? What unstated assumptions -- "ghost theories" -- are shaping our research without us even realizing it? In this episode of Rationally Speaking Julia talks with sociologist of science James Evans, who investigates questions like these using some clever data mining.Sun, 24 Jul 2016 12:00:00 -0500E17B6641-DD77-4594-967C-2BC15D807AD3NYC SkepticsHas science gotten slower over the years? What unstated assumptions are shaping our research without us even realizing it? Julia talks with sociologist of science James Evans, who investigates questions like these using some clever data mining.no50:28If people don't have free will, then can we be held morally responsible for our actions? In this episode Julia talks with philosopher Gregg Caruso, who advocates a position of "optimistic skepticism" on the topic.Rationally Speaking #163 - Gregg Caruso on "Free Will and Moral Responsibility"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-163-gregg-caruso-on-free-will-and-moral-responsibility.html
If people don't have free will, then can we be held morally responsible for our actions? And what would happen to society if we were to collectively shed our belief in free will? In this episode Julia talks with philosopher Gregg Caruso, who advocates a position of "optimistic skepticism" on the topic. Skepticism because people don't have free will as a sense of moral responsibility, but optimistic because society would be better off if we accept that we do.Sun, 10 Jul 2016 12:00:00 -05000EAD99DE-B2C2-4CBF-A852-86B773A62BE0NYC SkepticsIf people don't have free will, then can we be held morally responsible for our actions? In this episode Julia talks with philosopher Gregg Caruso, who advocates a position of "optimistic skepticism" on the topic.no59:38This episode features physicist Sean Carroll, author of the recent bestseller The Big Picture: on the Origins of Life, Meaning and the Universe Itself. Sean and Julia talk about the new "ism" he introduces in the book, "poetic naturalism."Rationally Speaking #162 - Sean Carroll on "Poetic Naturalism"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-162-sean-carroll-on-poetic-naturalism.html
Naturalism is the stance that everything that exists in the universe arises from "natural" causes, of the sort observable by science -- not supernatural ones. It's practically a foundational tenet of skepticism. But does it imply that there can be no meaning, or purpose, or morality in the universe?
This episode features physicist Sean Carroll, author of the recent bestseller The Big Picture: on the Origins of Life, Meaning and the Universe Itself. Sean and Julia talk about the new "ism" he introduces in the book, "poetic naturalism," and how it attempts to resolve the apparent conflict between science on the one hand, and things like morality, free will, consciousness, and meaning on the other.Sun, 26 Jun 2016 12:00:00 -050053F644B3-781C-4287-A9C2-333D87751638NYC SkepticsThis episode features physicist Sean Carroll, author of the recent bestseller The Big Picture: on the Origins of Life, Meaning and the Universe Itself. Sean and Julia talk about the new "ism" he introduces in the book, "poetic naturalism."no50:25Julia chats with the authors of Algorithms to Live By, about how to apply key algorithms from computer science to our real life problems. For example, deciding which apartment to rent, planning your career, and prioritizing your projects.Rationally Speaking #161 - Tom Griffiths and Brian Christian on "Algorithms to Live By"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-161-tom-griffiths-and-brian-christian-on-algorithms-to-li.html
Julia chats with the authors of Algorithms to Live By, about how to apply key algorithms from computer science to our real life problems. For example, deciding which apartment to rent, planning your career, and prioritizing your projects.
In the process, they discuss the assumptions that underlie those algorithms (and what to do about the fact that those assumptions are inevitably violated by the messy real world), and why procrastination might actually be the right algorithm for the wrong problem.Sun, 12 Jun 2016 12:00:00 -0500ECF23E7D-1665-4CD9-A70A-D53E334C6200NYC SkepticsJulia chats with the authors of Algorithms to Live By, about how to apply key algorithms from computer science to our real life problems. For example, deciding which apartment to rent, planning your career, and prioritizing your projects.no49:28It's the annual live episode, taped at NECSS in NYC! This year features returning guest Jacob Appel, a bioethicist (and lawyer, and psychiatrist). Jacob and Julia discuss various bioethical dilemmas.Rationally Speaking #160 - Live at NECSS -- Jacob Appel on "Tackling bioethical dilemmas"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-160-live-at-necss-jacob-appel-on-tackling-bioethical-dile.html
It's the annual live Rationally Speaking episode, taped at the Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism in NYC! This year features returning guest Jacob Appel, a bioethicist (and lawyer, and psychiatrist). Jacob and Julia discuss various bioethical dilemmas, such as: How do you handle parents who want to withhold medical treatment from their child for religious reasons? Is it unethical for American doctors to test new medications in the third-world? And what kinds of principles does a bioethicist use to justify their decisions, beyond "that's just my personal opinion"?Sun, 29 May 2016 12:00:00 -050000CC5580-CDBD-4C20-8B5B-5EDDE5FC643FNYC SkepticsIt's the annual live episode, taped at NECSS in NYC! This year features returning guest Jacob Appel, a bioethicist (and lawyer, and psychiatrist). Jacob and Julia discuss various bioethical dilemmas.no1:07:06Julia talks with philosopher of cognitive science Colin Allen about whether fish can feel pain. Are fish conscious, and how could we tell? What's the difference between pain and suffering?Rationally Speaking #159 - Colin Allen on "Do fish feel pain?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-159-colin-allen-on-do-fish-feel-pain.html
In this episode Julia talks with philosopher of cognitive science Colin Allen about whether fish can feel pain. In the process they explore a cluster of related questions: Are fish conscious, and how could we tell? What's the difference between pain and suffering? And are there evolutionarily adaptive reasons why animals would have the subjective experience of pain, as opposed to just instinctive reflexes to avoid potentially harmful stimuli?Sun, 15 May 2016 12:00:00 -0500D1286ACE-D505-4479-AD98-CB076596DE5DNYC SkepticsJulia talks with philosopher of cognitive science Colin Allen about whether fish can feel pain. Are fish conscious, and how could we tell? What's the difference between pain and suffering?no55:38Behavioral psychiatrist (and economist) George Ainslie demonstrates the existence of the ubiquitous phenomenon in human willpower, called hyperbolic discounting, in which our preferences change depending on how immediate or distant the choice is.Rationally Speaking #158 - Dr. George Ainslie on "Negotiating with your future selves"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-158-dr-george-ainslie-on-negotiating-with-your-future-sel.html
Ever make a plan to diet, or exercise, or study, and then -- when the scheduled hour rolls around -- decide, "Nah, I'll just put it off another day"? If you said "no," I don't believe you!
This episode features behavioral psychiatrist (and economist) George Ainslie, who demonstrated the existence of this ubiquitous phenomenon in human willpower, called hyperbolic discounting, in which our preferences change depending on how immediate or distant the choice is.
George and Julia discuss why hyperbolic discounting exists, and how it can be modeled as a negotiation between your current self and your future selves. In the process they explore some of the benefits and risks of this "intertemporal bargaining" approach to willpower, and how it relates to philosophical thought experiments such as the Prisoner's Dilemma and Kavka's Toxin. Sun, 01 May 2016 12:00:00 -0500C8C822D6-6A89-43C1-BADE-56737811170FNYC SkepticsBehavioral psychiatrist (and economist) George Ainslie demonstrates the existence of the ubiquitous phenomenon in human willpower, called hyperbolic discounting, in which our preferences change depending on how immediate or distant the choice is.no47:22In this episode, neuroscientist Suzana Herculano-Houzel lays out the mystery of the "Human advantage," and explains how a new technique she invented several years ago has shed light on what makes humans so much smarter than other species.Rationally Speaking #157 - Dr. Herculano-Houzel on "What made the human brain special?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-157-dr-herculano-houzel-on-what-made-the-human-brain-spec.html
For centuries, scientists have wondered what makes humans so much smarter than other species. Some proposed it was the size of our brain (though that didn't explain why whales weren't smarter than us); others thought it was the size of our brain relative to our body size (but there were problems with that explanation as well). In this episode, neuroscientist Suzana Herculano-Houzel lays out the mystery of the "Human advantage," and explains how a new technique she invented several years ago has shed light on some of these longstanding mysteries.Sun, 17 Apr 2016 12:00:00 -0500747BD78C-78B0-4137-93B9-0B5E4A8F085BNYC SkepticsIn this episode, neuroscientist Suzana Herculano-Houzel lays out the mystery of the "Human advantage," and explains how a new technique she invented several years ago has shed light on what makes humans so much smarter than other species.no51:40David McRaney describes his experiences with people who have done an about-face on some important topic, like 9/11 conspiracy theories. He and Julia discuss a technique for changing someone's mind with evidence.Rationally Speaking #156 - David McRaney on "Why it’s so hard to change someone’s mind"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-156-david-mcraney-on-why-its-so-hard-to-change-someones-m.html
You're probably already aware that it's hard to change someone's mind with logical arguments and evidence, especially about emotionally charged topics. But are there exceptions?
David McRaney, bestselling author of "You Are Not So Smart" (and host of the blog and podcast by the same name) describes his experiences with people who have done an about-face on some important topic, like 9/11 conspiracy theories. He and Julia discuss a technique for changing someone's mind with evidence, how individual mind-change mirrors scientific progress, and what happens when you confront Trump fans with facts that contradict their narrative.Sun, 3 Apr 2016 12:00:00 -050047FDB06C-595E-4000-BF11-243DAD007336NYC SkepticsDavid McRaney describes his experiences with people who have done an about-face on some important topic, like 9/11 conspiracy theories. He and Julia discuss a technique for changing someone's mind with evidence.no55:41He's been called a "Data vigilante." In this episode, Prof. Uri Simonsohn describes how he detects fraudulent work in psychology and economics -- what clues tip him off? How big of a problem is fraud relative to other issues like P-hacking?Rationally Speaking #155 - Uri Simonsohn on "Detecting fraud in social science"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-155-uri-simonsohn-on-detecting-fraud-in-social-science.html
He's been called a "Data vigilante." In this episode, Prof. Uri Simonsohn describes how he detects fraudulent work in psychology and economics -- what clues tip him off? How big of a problem is fraud relative to other issues like P-hacking? And what solutions are there?Sun, 20 Mar 2016 12:00:00 -05000279F8EE-FB21-41D6-B037-5D77EA27A1EBNYC SkepticsHe's been called a "Data vigilante." In this episode, Prof. Uri Simonsohn describes how he detects fraudulent work in psychology and economics -- what clues tip him off? How big of a problem is fraud relative to other issues like P-hacking?no59:58What if our biases are actually a sign of rationality? Tom Griffiths, professor of cognitive science at University of California, Berkeley, makes the case for why our built-in reasoning strategies might be optimal after all.Rationally Speaking #154 - Tom Griffiths on "Why your brain might be rational after all"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-154-tom-griffiths-on-why-your-brain-might-be-rational-aft.html
You've probably heard about cognitive biases -- the systematic errors human brains make when we try to reason or make decisions. But what if our biases are actually a sign of rationality? This episode features Tom Griffiths, professor of cognitive science at University of California, Berkeley and the director of the Computational Cognitive Science lab. Tom makes the case for why our built-in reasoning strategies might be optimal after all.Sun, 06 Mar 2016 12:00:00 -0500038ADE9A-C1F2-4C0B-BCA2-6C7624A3E3A3NYC SkepticsWhat if our biases are actually a sign of rationality? Tom Griffiths, professor of cognitive science at University of California, Berkeley, makes the case for why our built-in reasoning strategies might be optimal after all.no53:11This episode features Dr. Vinay Prasad, author of "Ending Medical Reversal: Improving Outcomes, Saving Lives," who talks with Julia about why medical research is so often fatally flawed, and what we can do about it.Rationally Speaking #153 - Dr. Vinay Prasad on "Why so much of what we 'know' about medicine is wrong"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-153-dr-vinay-prasad-on-why-so-much-of-what-we-know-about.html
We like to think of doctors as experts, whose recommendations are backed up by solid evidence. So why does it keep happening that a widely used medical intervention -- like estrogen replacement therapy, or heart stents -- turns out to be useless, or even harmful? This episode features Dr. Vinay Prasad, author of "Ending Medical Reversal: Improving Outcomes, Saving Lives," who talks with Julia about why medical research is so often fatally flawed, and what we can do about it.Sun, 21 Feb 2016 12:00:00 -0500619FEDF9-822B-4B8A-AD13-864480AE7483NYC SkepticsThis episode features Dr. Vinay Prasad, author of "Ending Medical Reversal: Improving Outcomes, Saving Lives," who talks with Julia about why medical research is so often fatally flawed, and what we can do about it.no47:50Julia and philosopher and blogger Dan Fincke discuss civility in public discourse. Do atheists and skeptics have a responsibility to be civil when expressing disagreement, and does that responsibility vary depending on who their target is?Rationally Speaking #152 - Dan Fincke on "The pros and cons of civil disagreement"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-152-dan-fincke-on-the-pros-and-cons-of-civil-disagreement.html
Julia invites philosopher and blogger Dan Fincke onto the show, inspired by a productive disagreement they had on Facebook. Their topic in this episode: civility in public discourse. Do atheists and skeptics have a responsibility to be civil when expressing disagreement, and does that responsibility vary depending on who their target is? Is there a legitimate role for offensive satire? And might there be downsides to civility?
Dan and Julia also revisit the subject of their original disagreement: the recent NECSS decision to rescind Richard Dawkins' speaking invitation, on account of a video he tweeted which compared feminists to Islamists. Dan and Julia attempt to put the Dawkins case study in the broader context of the civility debate, asking questions like: What makes something offensive, and can someone be *unjustifiably* offended? Sun, 7 Feb 2016 12:00:00 -0500D35208F9-486A-417D-96EF-BC492B031F39NYC SkepticsJulia and philosopher and blogger Dan Fincke discuss civility in public discourse. Do atheists and skeptics have a responsibility to be civil when expressing disagreement, and does that responsibility vary depending on who their target is?no53:41Julia interviews Maria Konnikova, science journalist and author of "The Confidence Game: Why we fall for it... Every time," who explains why con artists are so effective that even the best of us are vulnerable.Rationally Speaking #151 - Maria Konnikova on "Why everyone falls for con artists"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-151-maria-konnikova-on-why-everyone-falls-for-con-artists.html
You've probably heard about victims of con artists -- like the people who hand over their life savings to sketchy gurus or psychics, or the people who wire thousands of dollars to a "Nigerian prince" who just needs some help getting his far bigger fortune to you. And you've probably thought to yourself, "What a sucker. I'd never fall for something like that." But are you sure?
In this episode of Rationally Speaking, Julia interviews Maria Konnikova, science journalist and author of "The Confidence Game: Why we fall for it... Every time," who explains why con artists are so effective that even the best of us are vulnerable. Along the way, they explore questions like: Why do people refuse to believe they've been conned? Are con artists getting more sophisticated over time? And how do con artists view themselves -- do they rationalize their actions, or are they impassive sociopaths?Sun, 24 Jan 2016 12:00:00 -0500E501B6E2-54A4-4B12-9F72-D9EDCEDB543ENYC SkepticsJulia interviews Maria Konnikova, science journalist and author of "The Confidence Game: Why we fall for it... Every time," who explains why con artists are so effective that even the best of us are vulnerable.no49:26Julia interviews psychologist Elizabeth Loftus, whose pioneering work on human memory revealed that our memories can be contaminated by the questions people ask us, or by misinformation we encounter after the fact.Rationally Speaking #150 - Elizabeth Loftus on "The malleability of human memory"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-150-elizabeth-loftus-on-the-malleability-of-human-memory.html
Do you remember when you were a kid, and you had that great day at Disneyland where you got to meet Bugs Bunny? No? Think harder. It was a sunny day...
In this episode of Rationally Speaking, Julia interviews psychologist Elizabeth Loftus, whose pioneering work on human memory revealed that our memories can be contaminated by the questions people ask us, or by misinformation we encounter after the fact -- even to the point of making us remember entire events that never could have happened. (Like meeting Bugs Bunny, a Warner Bros character, at Disneyland.)Sun, 10 Jan 2016 12:00:00 -05004A6B6089-4EB0-4B77-9779-FD409257AEDANYC SkepticsJulia interviews psychologist Elizabeth Loftus, whose pioneering work on human memory revealed that our memories can be contaminated by the questions people ask us, or by misinformation we encounter after the fact.no47:33In this episode, psychologist Susan Gelman describes her work on the psychological trait of essentialism: the innate human urge to categorize reality and to assume that those categories reflect meaningful, invisible differences.Rationally Speaking #149 - Susan Gelman on "How essentialism shapes our thinking"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs-149-susan-gelman-on-how-essentialism-shapes-our-thinking.html
In this episode, psychologist Susan Gelman describes her work on the psychological trait of essentialism: the innate human urge to categorize reality and to assume that those categories reflect meaningful, invisible differences. Julia and Susan discuss why the discovery of essentialism in children was such a surprise to scientists, how the language we use affects the way we view reality, and whether essentialism is to blame for bad philosophy.Sun, 13 Dec 2015 12:00:00 -05009C77FF61-81FB-49BD-8137-C38CD36B52CANYC SkepticsIn this episode, psychologist Susan Gelman describes her work on the psychological trait of essentialism: the innate human urge to categorize reality and to assume that those categories reflect meaningful, invisible differences.no47:26Julia interviews philosophy professor David Kyle Johnson, the author of "The Myths that Stole Christmas." Kyle explains the little-known origin story of Santa Claus and then Kyle and Julia debate the ethics of lying to children about Santa Claus.Rationally Speaking #148 - David Kyle Johnson on "The Myths that Stole Christmas"https://gskeptic.squarespace.com/show/rs-148-david-kyle-johnson-on-the-myths-that-stole-christmas.html
We're all familiar with Santa Claus -- but how much do you *really* know about that jolly old elf? In this episode, Julia interviews philosophy professor David Kyle Johnson, the author of "The Myths that Stole Christmas." Kyle explains the little-known, and somewhat sinister, origin story of Santa Claus -- and then Kyle and Julia debate whether it's ethical to lie to your children about the reality of Santa Claus (and possible alternatives to explore).Sun, 29 Nov 2015 12:00:00 -05000BC7E11C-3852-4F3B-9949-93FA400C6696NYC SkepticsJulia interviews philosophy professor David Kyle Johnson, the author of "The Myths that Stole Christmas." Kyle explains the little-known origin story of Santa Claus and then Kyle and Julia debate the ethics of lying to children about Santa Claus.no45:35Professor of statistics and political science Andrew Gelman shines some clarifying light on the intersection between politics and class in America, explaining what the numbers really show. He and Julia also ask "Is it rational to vote?"Rationally Speaking #147 - Andrew Gelman on "Why do Americans vote the way they do?"https://gskeptic.squarespace.com/show/rs147-andrew-gelman-on-why-do-americans-vote-the-way-they-do.html
There are two contradictory stories about politics and class: On the one hand, that the Republicans are the party of the fat cat businessmen and the Democrats are the party of the people. And on the other hand, that the Republicans are the party of the salt-of-the-earth Joe Sixpacks, while the Democrats are latte-sipping elites. In this episode, professor of statistics and political science Andrew Gelman shines some clarifying light on the intersection between politics and class in America, explaining what the numbers really show. He and Julia also cover the question, "Is it rational to vote?"Sun, 15 Nov 2015 18:00:00 -0500B88985A7-B9AF-42CA-BAB0-717AC856F9BFNYC SkepticsProfessor of statistics and political science Andrew Gelman shines some clarifying light on the intersection between politics and class in America, explaining what the numbers really show. He and Julia also ask "Is it rational to vote?"no52:41Rationally Speaking #146 - Jesse Richardson on "The pros and cons of making fallacies famous"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs146-jesse-richardson-on-the-pros-and-cons-of-making-fallac.html
Sun, 01 Nov 2015 10:00:57 -0500BAE65484-D93D-416F-B15B-41194A729DDBNYC SkepticsJesse Richardson, a creative director who has been using his advertising background "for good and not for evil" by building skeptic sites including "Your Logical Fallacy Is.” Julia asks: Aren't many so-called logical fallacies not actually fallacious?no50:04Rationally Speaking #145 - Phil Tetlock on "Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs145-phil-tetlock-on-superforecasting-the-art-and-science-o.html
Sun, 18 Oct 2015 10:00:44 -040049F95EF4-8311-4CBE-A263-04A259E10B2DNYC SkepticsProfessor Phil Tetlock discusses his team’s landslide wins in forecasting tournaments sponsored by the US government. Also, the problem of meta-uncertainty and how much we should expect prediction skill in one domain to carry over to other domains.no55:44Rationally Speaking #144 - Bryan Caplan on "Does parenting matter?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs144-bryan-caplan-on-does-parenting-matter.html
Sun, 04 Oct 2015 11:21:08 -0400E5758BDD-892A-422C-9AE3-B6590784C1FBNYC SkepticsEconomist Bryan Caplan argues that, despite our intuition that parenting choices affect children's life outcomes, there's strong evidence to the contrary. They also explore what that means for how people should parent and how many kids they should have.no1:03:26Rationally Speaking #143 - Scott Aaronson on "The theorem that proves rationalists can't disagree"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs143-scott-aaronson-on-the-theorem-that-proves-rationalists.html
Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:00:19 -0400FB3B4686-0C1E-4C3C-A494-DF509EC3CA52NYC SkepticsScott Aaronson. professor of computer science at MIT, discusses a theorem which implies that two people cannot rationally disagree after they've shared their opinions and information. Also, why should you favor your own beliefs just because they're yours?no50:16Rationally Speaking #142 - Paul Bloom on "The case against empathy"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs142-paul-bloom-on-the-case-against-empathy.html
Sun, 06 Sep 2015 10:00:52 -0400E4C6EA59-F046-4D24-B20E-624B5CC91684NYC SkepticsPsychologist Paul Bloom and Julia discuss what empathy is, why Paul is concerned that it's a terrible guide to moral decision making, and what the alternatives are.no52:10Rationally Speaking #141 - Dan Sperber on "The Argumentative Theory of reason"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs141-dan-sperber-on-the-argumentative-theory-of-reason.html
The traditional story about reason is that it evolved to help humans see the world more clearly and (thereby) make better decisions. But on that view, some mysteries remain: why is the human brain so biased? Why are we so much better at defending our pre-existing views than at evaluating new ideas objectively?

In this episode of Rationally Speaking, Julia talks with guest Dan Sperber, professor of cognitive and social sciences, who is famous for advancing an alternate view of reason: that it evolved to help us argue with our fellow humans and convince them that we're right.

Dan Sperber is a social and cognitive scientist. His most influential work has been in the fields of cognitive anthropology and linguistic pragmatics. Sperber currently holds the positions of Directeur de Recherche émérite at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique and Director of the International Cognition and Culture Institute.

]]>
Sun, 23 Aug 2015 10:00:28 -0400036F25C8-2E6E-4244-B562-16F37FFD14A0NYC SkepticsJulia talks with guest Dan Sperber, professor of cognitive and social sciences and famous for advancing an alternate view of reason: that it evolved to help us argue with our fellow humans and convince them that we're right.
no56:15Rationally Speaking #140 - Kenny Easwaran on, "Newcomb's Paradox and the tragedy of rationality"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs140-kenny-easwaran-on-newcombs-paradox-and-the-tragedy-of.html
This episode of Rationally Speaking features philosopher Kenny Easwaran, who delves into the notorious "Newcomb's Paradox" -- the puzzle about which it was once said, "To almost everyone it is perfectly clear and obvious what should be done. The difficulty is that these people seem to divide almost evenly on the problem, with large numbers thinking that the opposing half is just being silly." Kenny and Julia explore how Newcomb's Paradox is related to other puzzles in decision theory, like the Prisoners' Dilemma; what its implications are for free will; and what Kenny calls the "deep tragedy" at the heart of rationality.

Kenny Easwaran is an Associate Professor in the Philosophy Department at Texas A&M University. He works on several topics relating to epistemology and decision theory, and the role of probability in helping to understand these and related concepts.

]]>
Sun, 09 Aug 2015 10:00:15 -040053022B9F-50CA-47D9-A799-B9E24930C743NYC SkepticsPhilosopher Kenny Easwaran delves into the Newcomb's Paradox and how it is related to other puzzles in decision theory, like the Prisoners' Dilemma. Also, its implications for free will and what Kenny calls the "deep tragedy" at the heart of rationality.
no54:31Rationally Speaking #139 - Eric Schwitzgebel on "Moral hypocrisy: why doesn't knowing about ethics make people more ethical?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs139-eric-schwitzgebel-on-moral-hypocrisy-why-doesnt-knowin.html
You might expect that professional ethicists -- people whose job it is to determine which behaviors are ethical and why -- would behave more ethically than other people. You'd be wrong! This episode features philosopher Eric Schwitzgebel , who is well known for his work studying whether experts in ethics live up to their own standards. He and Julia discuss why the answer is "no," and explore questions like, "How do you decide how moral you're going to try to be?"

Eric Schwitzgebel is a Professor of Philosophy at University of California at Riverside. He is the co-author (with Russell T. Hurlburt) of Describing Inner Experience?: Proponent Meets Skeptic and blogs at The splintered Mind.

]]>
Sun, 26 Jul 2015 11:00:21 -0400808D7C2B-53A4-400C-8D0E-B2048D1374EFNYC SkepticsIf you expect that professional ethicists would behave more ethically than other people you'd be wrong. Philosopher Eric Schwitzgebel and Julia discuss why the answer is no and explore questions like how do you decide how moral you're going to try to be?
no48:10Rationally Speaking #138 - Ian Morris on, "Why the West rules -- for now"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs138-ian-morris-on-why-the-west-rules-for-now.html
For several centuries, historians have tried to answer the question: "Why is Western Europe (and later, North America) the dominant world power?" Past explanations cited culture, or "great men" who influenced the course of history. Stanford historian Prof. Ian Morris casts doubt on those explanations, instead taking a data-driven approach to the question that attempts to measure "social development" over history and find explanations for it. In this episode of Rationally Speaking, Julia delves into Morris' method and conclusions, and asks: can we make causal inferences about history?

Ian Morris is Willard Professor of Classics and Fellow of the Archaeology Center, Stanford University. He is a historian and archaeologist. He has excavated in Britain, Greece, and Italy, most recently as director of Stanford's dig at Monte Polizzo, a native Sicilian site from the age of Greek colonization. He is also the author of a number of books, among them: "Why the West Rules--for Now". "War! What Is It Good For?", and "Foragers, Farmers, and Fossil Fuels."

]]>
Sun, 12 Jul 2015 10:00:56 -04004DCAE4F4-9679-4EC7-A674-2A2BEBCFAED7NYC SkepticsIan Morris discusses his theory of why Western Europe and North America have become the dominant world powers. He takes a data-driven approach to measure social development over history to find explanations. Also, can we make inferences about history?no54:56Rationally Speaking #137 - Marc Lipsitch on, "Should scientists try to create dangerous viruses?"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs137-marc-lipsitch-on-should-scientists-try-to-create-dange.html
A controversial field of research is "gain-of-function," in which scientists take a virus (like a strain of flu) and attempt to make it more dangerous, for example by making it transmissible in mammals when it had previously been solely an avian flu. The motivation is to learn how viruses might mutate in nature so that we can be prepared -- but what if those engineered "superbugs" escape the lab and start a pandemic? In this episode of Rationally Speaking, Harvard professor of epidemiology Marc Lipsitch argues that the risks outweigh the benefits, and that we should halt gain-of-function research as soon as possible.

Marc Lipsitch is Professor of Epidemiology with primary appointment in the Department of Epidemiology and a joint appointment in the Department of Immunology and Infectious Diseases. He directs the Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics, a center of excellence funded by the MIDAS program of NIH/NIGMS. He is also the Associate Director of the Interdisciplinary Concentration in Infectious Disease Epidemiology.

]]>
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 12:00:45 -0400C18CEC80-EF54-4806-94EF-10EEE09B5E6CNYC SkepticsEpidemiology Marc Lipsitch discusses a controversial field of research, gain-of-function, in which scientists take a virus and attempt to make it more dangerous. He argues that the risks outweigh the benefits and that we should halt it as soon as possibleno44:48Rationally Speaking #136 - David Roodman on Why Microfinance Won't Cure Global Povertyhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs136-david-roodman-on-why-microfinance-wont-cure-global-pov.html
Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:00:51 -04006723EDFC-02A8-4FB9-BCB1-D62A14A5B28FNYC SkepticsEconomist David Roodman casts a critical eye on microfinance as a panacea for global poverty. Why it's hard to design a good study, even a randomized one; different conceptions of development, and why he doesn't think we should give up on microfinance.no42:51Rationally Speaking #135 - Robin Hanson on: "Most human behavior is signaling"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs134-michael-shermer-on-science-drives-moral-progress.html
In this episode, economist Robin Hanson explains the signaling theory of human behavior: That our motivations for our choices, about school, shopping, medical care, and so on, evolved primarily to shape other people's perceptions of us. In the process Robin and Julia discuss what makes a good theory: How to decide what you should (a priori) expect to see, and why simplicity is a virtue.

Robin Dale Hanson is an associate professor of economics at George Mason University and a research associate at the Future of Humanity Institute of Oxford University. He is known as an expert on idea futures and markets, and he was involved in the creation of the Foresight Exchange and DARPA's Future MAP project. he blogs at Overcomng Bias.

]]>
Sun, 31 May 2015 13:00:08 -04005DF08574-9C5E-48A5-B675-964FB1A005E1NYC SkepticsEconomist Robin Hanson explains the signaling theory of human behavior: That motivations for our behaviors, such as school choice, evolved primarily to shape other people's perceptions of us. Also, what makes a good theory and why simplicity is a virtueno47:17Rationally Speaking #134 - Michael Shermer on: "Science drives moral progress"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs134-michael-shermer-on-science-drives-moral-progress.html
Common wisdom holds that the world is getting more violent, but is that really true? Leading skeptic Michael Shermer, professor and author of many books on science, morality and skepticism, argues to the contrary. Shermer's thesis in his recent book, "The Moral Arc: How Science Leads Humanity Toward Truth, Justice, and Freedom," is that as science has advanced our understanding of the world, we have become more willing to expand our circle of empathy beyond our own provincial "tribes," and more able to design our societies to encourage human flourishing.

Dr. Michael Shermer is the Founding Publisher of Skeptic magazine, a monthly columnist for Scientific American, a regular contributor to Time.com, and Presidential Fellow at Chapman University. His new book is The Moral Arc: How Science and Reason Lead Humanity Toward Truth, Justice, and Freedom.

]]>
Sun, 17 May 2015 10:00:05 -04006279817E-B641-47BB-B8B1-7D910156052ANYC SkepticsMichael Shermer argues against the common wisdom which holds that the world is getting more violent. His thesis is that as science advances our understanding of the world we are becoming more able to design our societies to encourage human flourishing.no46:28Rationally Speaking #133 - Sean Carroll on "The Many Worlds Interpretatioln Is Probably Correct"http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs133-sean-carroll-on-why-the-many-worlds-interpretatioln-is.html
In this episode of Rationally Speaking, Caltech physicist Sean Carroll describes an "embarrassing" state of affairs in modern physics: that we still don't know how to interpret quantum mechanics, almost a century after its discovery. Sean explains why he thinks the "Many Worlds Interpretation" (MWI) is the most plausible one we've got, and Julia explores his thoughts on questions like: Can MWI be tested? Is it "simpler" than other interpretations, and why? And does MWI threaten to destroy our systems of ethics?

Sean Michael Carroll is a research professor in the Department of Physics at the California Institute of Technology. He is a theoretical cosmologist specializing in dark energy and general relativity.

]]>
Sun, 03 May 2015 12:00:55 -0400564D50FC-743B-4039-B4AA-4A3D3D2D2B77NYC SkepticsPhysicist Sean Carroll describes the embarrassing fact that we still don't know how to interpret quantum mechanics and why he thinks the MWI is the best one. Also, can it be tested, is it simpler, and does it threaten to destroy our systems of ethics?no47:44Rationally Speaking #132 - Live From NECSS 2015http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs132-live-from-necss-2015.html
Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:00:18 -04003EF25458-BB18-4C10-B1B8-93CA4846106BNYC SkepticsThis live episode, taped at the 2015 NECSS conference in NYC, is a special one: it's Massimo's last episode as co-host! He and Julia look back over their history together and discuss which topics they've changed their mind about since the podcast began.no1:01:46Rationally Speaking #131 - James Randi on Being An Honest Liar http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs131-james-randi-on-being-an-honest-liar.html
Sun, 05 Apr 2015 10:00:01 -0400D9D2E94F-63CF-42CC-9DF5-8CF499CA30AANYC SkepticsThe Amazing Randi discusses the past and future of the Skeptic movement. Does he think Skepticism has shaped public opinion in any significant ways, what he wants the JREF to look like several years from now, and what he has changed his mind about and whyno48:18Rationally Speaking #130 - The Atheists Own 10 Commandmentshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs130-the-atheists-own-10-commandments.html
Sun, 22 Mar 2015 10:00:38 -0400A334B5F3-508A-4F71-A15A-6C656C47E7FANYC SkepticsJ&M discuss a recent attempt to define a list of 10 secular commandments. They debate the relevance of particular ones, like "All truth is proportional to the evidence," and the purpose of the project overall, and address some criticisms of them.no48:56Rationally Speaking #129 - Would the World Be a Better Place Without Religion?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs129-would-the-world-be-a-better-place-without-religion.html
Sun, 08 Mar 2015 10:00:48 -040053D6ACDB-11F9-403A-9B32-1FF5C5167D2CNYC SkepticsWhat is the evidence as to whether the world would be better off without religion? Research shows correlation between religiosity and prosocial traits. Also, are there other reasons to suspect that religion's net effect on the world is negative?no51:52Rationally Speaking #128 - 5th Anniversary Live Showhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/ds128-5th-anniversary-live-show.html
Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:00:48 -0500026F0C96-32AC-46DC-8964-15726E4FA579NYC SkepticsOn a live episode, M&J respond to live questions. Topics include: books to read to improve your rationality, the biggest problems in the skeptic community, and how to get politicians to be reasonable. Also, Massimo’s surprising and poignant announcement.no1:09:24Rationally Speaking #127 - Elise Crull on Philosophy of Physicshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs127-elise-crull-on-philosophy-of-physics.html
Sun, 08 Feb 2015 10:00:20 -0500B79A30D1-FE11-4EB0-A074-4CCE8F42EF79NYC SkepticsPhilosopher of physics Elise Crull explains why some physicist’s view that a philosopher of science is as much use to scientists as an ornithologist is to birds is wrong. Also, what philosophers have to say about physics and whether anything really existsno49:41Rationally Speaking #126 - Preston Bost on Crazy Beliefs, Sane Believershttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs126-preston-bost-on-crazy-beliefs-sane-believers.html
Sun, 25 Jan 2015 10:00:15 -0500E6A3EAC8-A803-4AB3-9399-FAA01E7FB737NYC SkepticsProf. of psychology Preston Bost joins M&J to discuss whether it can be rational to believe in conspiracy theories. What kinds of people latch onto them, and why? Also, possible evolutionary reasons for their appeal, and which beliefs are rational anyway?no43:42Rationally Speaking #125 - The Quantified Selfhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs125-the-quantified-self.html
Sun, 18 Jan 2015 10:00:10 -0500F779A958-5798-41C1-8B17-E539F98C8BE2NYC SkepticsM&J discuss the recent rise of the new "Quantified Self" movement in which people are mining their own data for insights about how to be happier and more effective. They discuss self tracking, what you can learn from it, and what its pitfalls might be.no49:56Rationally Speaking #124 - Stoicismhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs124-stoicism.html
Sun, 28 Dec 2014 12:00:48 -050013654A41-BE2B-4BF9-918E-A2FF4D1EB44BNYC SkepticsThe ancient philosophy of stoicism, which advocates (among other things) practicing mindfulness, accepting the things you can't change, and regulating negative emotions. Also, the results of Massimo's experimentation with it and its potential problems.no45:56Rationally Speaking #123 - Daniel Lakens on P-Hacking and Other Problems in Psychology Researchhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs123-daniel-lakens-on-p-hacking-and-other-problems-in-psych.html
Sun, 14 Dec 2014 10:00:35 -0500A8CC2A1F-CFC6-4C56-A455-2E295B4479A0NYC SkepticsProfessor Daniel Lakens from the Eindhoven University of Technology joins M&J to discuss what's wrong with social sciences research. Why so many psychology papers can't be trusted, and what solutions might exist, including fixing skewed incentives.no45:56Rationally Speaking #122 - The Science and Philosophy of Humorhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs122-the-science-and-philosophy-of-humor.html
Sun, 30 Nov 2014 20:00:43 -0500694DC862-AAF0-4582-8CBE-83941E0D5CBANYC SkepticsM&J delve into the science and philosophy of comedy, questions like: Why did humans evolve to have a sense of humor? What's the relationship between comedy and existential terror? And how many bad philosophy jokes can Massimo tell before Julia loses it?no50:49Rationally Speaking #121 - Benjamin Todd on 80,000 Hourshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs121-todd-benjamin-on-80000-hours.html
Sun, 16 Nov 2014 11:00:20 -05004E230361-A95D-413E-9806-611E7811A22FNYC SkepticsBenjamin Todd, executive director of 80,000 Hours, on which career should people choose to help others effectively? Medicine? Research? Non-profit? Also, the heuristics that should go into career choices, and what exactly we mean by doing good.no50:59Rationally Speaking #120 - Nihilismhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs120-nihilism.html
Sun, 02 Nov 2014 11:00:08 -05002128D3BA-CB05-47F4-B8C3-A9A79BEC0E18NYC SkepticsMassimo and Julia explain the different types of philosophical nihilism, reveal their own personal views on the subject, and explore why nihilism has such different emotional effects on different people.no51:38Rationally Speaking #111 - Human Naturehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs111-human-nature.html
Sun, 29 Jun 2014 11:00:41 -0400E17F6641-D7C8-404B-B484-EF01CE6E60EFNYC SkepticsThe science and philosophy of human nature: what traits are "built in" to being human, and how would we know? And once we know what human nature consists of, should we try to protect it against changes?no55:12Rationally Speaking #119 - Aaron James on Assholes (and Bitches)http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs119-aaron-james-on-assholes-and-bitches.html
Tue, 21 Oct 2014 20:00:21 -0400284E4D59-440F-44CC-8CB0-A6B6B0405104NYC SkepticsPhilosophy professor Aaron James discusses what makes an asshole an asshole, and why they're so uniquely maddening. Also, the assholery of certain people in politics and atheism, the difference between an asshole and a bitch, and swap coping mechanisms.no46:38Rationally Speaking #118 - Live From Baruch College With Dr. Steven Novellahttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs118-live-from-baruch-college-with-dr-steven-novella.html
Sun, 05 Oct 2014 18:00:41 -04009EFE27D5-1017-4B29-AAA2-F514367E1177NYC SkepticsSteve, Massimo, and Julia discuss the recent lawsuit facing the SGU, share their gripes about the ways that skeptics sometimes oversimplify the issues, and answer audience questions such as, "Is anything off-limits to skeptical activism?" no1:50:08Rationally Speaking #117 - Maria Konnikova on How to Think Like Sherlock Holmeshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs117-maria-konnikova-on-how-to-think-like-sherlock-holmes.html
Sun, 21 Sep 2014 10:00:29 -0400705DCB2E-D318-42F3-B203-F37C080612C3NYC SkepticsPsychologist Maria Konnikova discusses how to use your logical, reflective side in everyday life. Also, tips on Holmesian thinking, Is your unreflective, Watsonian side really so bad, and did Sherlock make mistakes in his famous quotes about thinking?no48:47Rationally Speaking #116 - Jim Baggott and Massimo on Farewell to Realityhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs116-jim-baggott-and-massimo-on-farewell-to-reality.html
Sun, 07 Sep 2014 12:00:37 -0400C24A7ABA-5661-45D1-BCA8-54C73AC39DB8NYC SkepticsJim Baggot, one of an increasingly vocal number of critics of some directions taken lately by fundamental theoretical physics, particularly string theory. They explore what it means for some physicists to call for a new era of “post-empirical” science.
no28:52Rationally Speaking #115 - Maarten Boudry and Massimo On the Difference Between Science and Pseudosciencehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs115-maarten-boudry-and-massimo-on-the-difference-between-sc.html
Sun, 24 Aug 2014 11:00:34 -0400A88BEA2F-03C2-4A16-8852-8C0C04585E5FNYC SkepticsPhilosopher of science Maarten Boudry sits down with Massimo to chat about the difference between science and pseudoscience, and why it is an important topic not just in philosophy circles, but in the broader public arena as well.no33:24Rationally Speaking #114 - Massimo and Julia Go Freestylehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs114-massimo-and-julia-go-freestyle.html
Sun, 10 Aug 2014 11:00:55 -0400B08A30C4-B667-42A5-91F0-59FBC0EAF014NYC SkepticsM&J go rogue: no guest, no pre-set topics, just conversation about things on their mind. Among other things, the questions of how to change your mind, the "surprise journalling" method, and, importantly: How do you know if you're a jerk?no51:32Rationally Speaking #113 - The Turing Testhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs113-the-turing-test.html
Sun, 27 Jul 2014 16:39:58 -04009D5C5107-0B07-43C0-9197-33A72AC96894NYC SkepticsJ&M take a critical look at the Turing test as a standard for consciousness and at an artificial intelligence named “Eugine Goostman” which reportedly passed the test. Also, what it would mean for an AI to be conscious, and how we could ever tell.no52:22Rationally Speaking #112 - Race: Just a Social Construct?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs112-race-just-a-social-construct.html
Sun, 13 Jul 2014 11:00:39 -0400915F1E7C-57CA-4F4E-A47A-47CE0D361759NYC SkepticsThe problems with race as a genetically-based concept. Also, a controversial recent book on the subject and the problems with analyses that attempt to attribute differences such as those between rich and poor countries to innate racial differences.no48:20Rationally Speaking #110 - Scientia, the Unity of Knowledgehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs110-scientia-the-unity-of-knowledge.html
Sun, 15 Jun 2014 15:00:42 -0400789569BB-AEDC-48E9-88AE-2CB3871DD730NYC SkepticsM&J discuss "scientia," the pursuit of knowledge and understanding, and Massimo’s new "Scientia Salon" online journal. Also, how the boundaries blur between math, science and philosophy, and how the Internet can change scientific research.no55:38Rationally Speaking #109 - Rebecca Newberger Goldstein on Plato at the Googleplexhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs109-rebecca-newberger-goldstein-on-plato-at-the-googleplex.html
Sun, 01 Jun 2014 18:00:51 -0400CE9F15F0-A169-45F6-B118-D284484DC844NYC SkepticsPhilosopher and author Rebecca Goldstein discusses her latest book: "Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away." Also, the value of philosophy in modern science and whether it makes sense to designate experts in ethical reasoning.no50:38Rationally Speaking #108 - Suicidehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs108-suicide.html
Sun, 18 May 2014 11:00:49 -040077A46956-CFE2-49DB-8B5F-26442CB2F671NYC SkepticsM&J discuss the ethics of suicide through the lens of several major philosophies. They also explore the social science of suicide: how does one person's suicide affect the community? no55:00Rationally Speaking #107 - MOOCshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs107-moocs.html
Sun, 04 May 2014 13:00:18 -0400804A75F2-7CE3-4DCF-A2CC-45D23E644EA4NYC SkepticsMassive Open Online Courses, or MOOCs for short, have been hailed as the next wave in secondary education. M&J discuss how to measure MOOCs' effectiveness, separating the hype from the genuine promise. Also, other forms of alternative higher education.no48:31Rationally Speaking #106 - Live From NECSS With Lawrence Krausshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs106-live-from-necss-with-lawrence-krauss.html
Sun, 20 Apr 2014 15:00:54 -0400919C4482-4FD8-4DAF-9FCA-95529D785DECNYC SkepticsTheoretical physicist and author Lawrence Krauss chats with M&J about whether the laws of the universe demand some kind of explanation, whether string theory should be deemed a failure, and how he ended up featured in a geocentrist documentary. no1:02:40Rationally Speaking #105 - Greta Christina on Coming Out Atheisthttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs105-greta-christina-on-coming-out-atheist.html
Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:00:09 -04007019CC18-F853-4AC8-A9D2-E76F6840EDF2NYC SkepticsAtheist activist Greta Christina and M&J disagree over the boundaries of the atheist movement, and discuss how cognitive biases make it hard to asses whether people regret coming out as atheists, and what should atheist communities be modeled after.no59:24Rationally Speaking #104 - Edward Frenkel on Love and Mathhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs104-edward-frenkel-on-love-and-math.html
Sun, 23 Mar 2014 21:00:48 -04006C748D52-941B-41F3-A00D-CC215F9797D4NYC SkepticsMathematician Edward Frenkel, author of "Love and Math," talks about how the subject seduced him as a young man, how he believes it's generally mis-taught in schools, and how you can find beauty -- even romance -- in mathematics.no48:04Rationally Speaking #103 - Neil deGrasse Tyson on Why He Doesn't Call Himself an Atheisthttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs103-neil-degrasse-tyson-on-why-he-doesnt-call-himself-an-a.html
Sun, 09 Mar 2014 11:00:51 -04007ED1472C-CA39-4235-A7E7-66245F3165ADNYC SkepticsAstrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson discusses the question of whether he should call himself an atheist. In a Big Think video he explained that he avoids that label because it causes people to make all sorts of unflattering (and often untrue) assumptions.no52:54Rationally Speaking #102 - Zach Weinersmith on His "SMBC" Webcomic http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs102-zach-weinersmith-on-his-smbc-webcomic.html
Sun, 23 Feb 2014 13:00:24 -0500345B5036-A655-4880-8CAB-5070E9D6FF5CNYC SkepticsGuest Zach Weinersmith, author of SMBC, the popular “Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal" webcomic, clarifies his position in the ongoing philosophy vs. science fight, the ethics of offensive jokes, and discusses BAHFest and his movie ”Starpocalype."no50:38Rationally Speaking #101 - Max Tegmark on the Mathematical Universe Hypothesishttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show//show/rs101-max-tegmark-on-the-mathematical-universe-hypothesis.html
Sun, 09 Feb 2014 11:51:34 -05003F179359-2E0C-4B10-B64B-F2CC3B917FFFNYC SkepticsPhysicist Max Tegmark joins us to talk about his book "Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality" in which explains the controversial argument that everything around us is made of math.no51:08Rationally Speaking #100 - Live Q&A: Massimo and Julia Answer Everything!http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/rs100-live-qamassimo-and-julia-answer-everything.html
Sun, 26 Jan 2014 20:30:59 -05000A48B25E-2345-4505-AC17-72E0B0BC2A0DNYC SkepticsQ&A recorded live at the Jefferson Market Library in NYC. Topics range from science, philosophy and the borderlands between the two. The questions push the hosts to think on their feet, and even to admit their ignorance on stage!no1:19:10Rationally Speaking #99 - Judith Schlesinger Exposes the Myth of the Mad Geniushttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs99-judith-schlesinger-exposes-the-myth-of-the-mad-genius.html
Sun, 22 Dec 2013 10:00:36 -0500D7BE1897-0FA0-40A6-B998-053B01444E11NYC SkepticsPsychologist Judith Schlesinger explains why she thinks that, despite the impression you'd get from TV, movies, and plenty of common wisdom, the "mad genius" archetype is simply the result of folklore, misunderstanding, and bad research.no43:42Rationally Speaking #98 - Jerome Wakefield on Psychiatric Diagnoses: Science or Pseudoscience?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs98-jerome-wakefield-on-psychiatric-diagnoses-science-or-ps.html
Sun, 08 Dec 2013 11:00:58 -0500AB9DCE6E-3E6B-46F2-AF2E-D8232707FD10NYC SkepticsDr. Jerome Wakefield, psychiatrist and PhD in philosophy, discusses the arbitrariness of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), and the controversies around various mental disorders, including depression and sexual fetishes.no53:36Rationally Speaking #97 - Peter Singer on Being a Utilitarian in the Real World http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs97-peter-singer-on-being-a-utilitarian-in-the-real-world.html
Sun, 24 Nov 2013 20:00:39 -05004F0B2AA7-7D97-4C9A-AF76-25E7D5F474D3NYC SkepticsEthicist Peter Singer discusses his utilitarian arguments about how we should treat animals, why we have a moral obligation to give to charity, whether infants should count as "people," and more that have won him widespread fame -- and notoriety.no47:00Rationally Speaking #96 - Sally Satel and Scott Lilienfeld on the Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neurosciencehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs96-sally-satel-and-scott-lilienfeld-on-the-seductive-appea.html
Sun, 10 Nov 2013 10:00:11 -050044260C29-6510-4395-8770-C1FB51C5A4B6NYC SkepticsPsychiatrist Sally Satel and psychologyst Scott O. Lilienfeld discuss their book "Brainwashed: The Seductive Appeal of Mindless Neuroscience" and how much explanatory power does neuroscience really have on areas such as love, morality, addiction.no52:26Rationally Speaking #95 - Gerard O'Brien On the Computational Theory of Mind http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs95-gerard-obrien-on-the-computational-theory-of-mind.html
Sun, 27 Oct 2013 10:00:26 -04006E085CC2-D6C7-4178-9DC8-187E4419359BNYC SkepticsPhilosopher Gerard O'Brien from the University of Adelaide, who specializes in the philosophy of mind, discusses the computational theory of mind and what it implies about consciousness, intelligence, and the possibility of uploading people onto computersno56:04Rationally Speaking #94 - Maarten Boudry on Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problemhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs94-maarten-boudry-on-philosophy-of-pseudoscience-reconside.html
Thu, 03 Oct 2013 10:00:44 -0400D8F716D7-EFAA-4D98-8AED-22582FFE8D0FNYC SkepticsMassimo and philosopher Maarten Boudry from Ghent University discuss their new book, "Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem" on the difference between science and pseudocience. Also, learn how Maarten pranked theologians.no1:00:24Rationally Speaking #93 - Dr. Michael E. Mann On The Science Of Climate Changehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs93-dr-michael-e-mann-on-the-science-of-climate-change.html
In this episode of Rationally Speaking, Julia and Massimo talk to physicist and climatologist Michael Mann about how we know the climate is getting warmer. Among other things, they cover the physical processes of climate change, the role that predictive models have played in confirming scientists' theories about the rate of warming, and what are uncertainties in the science. Also, how optimistic we should be about technological solutions to the problem.

Dr. Michael E. Mann is Distinguished Professor of Meteorology at Penn State University, with joint appointments in the Department of Geosciences and the Earth and Environmental Systems Institute. He is also director of the Penn State Earth System Science Center. Dr. Mann is author of more than 160 peer-reviewed and edited publications, and has published two books including Dire Predictions: "Understanding Global Warming in 2008 and The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines" in 2012. He is also a co-founder and avid contributor to the award-winning science website RealClimate.org.

]]>
Sun, 29 Sep 2013 00:00:05 -0400C922D286-D16F-4826-87F9-55B810E8E51CNYC SkepticsPhysicist and climatologist Michael Mann discusses climate change, the physical processes of climate change, the predictive models used, the uncertainties involved, and how optimistic we should be about technological solutions to the problem.
no55:20Rationally Speaking #92 - Dr. Paul Offit On Believing in Magichttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs92-dr-paul-offit-on-believing-in-magic.html
Sun, 15 Sep 2013 10:00:40 -0400C113C0ED-6342-4889-A993-AE29548327B8NYC SkepticsHow has alternative medicine managed to become so mainstream? Dr. Paul Offit, a pediatrician specializing in infectious diseases discusses alternative medicine, why it's still unregulated, and whether or not to tell patients about placebos.no45:20Rationally Speaking #91 - Kendrick Frazier On Skeptical Inquiryhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs91-kendrick-frazier-on-skeptical-inquiry.html
On this episode of Rationally Speaking, Massimo and Julia survey the present, past, and future of skepticism. Special guest Kendrick Frazier, editor of Skeptical Inquirer, talks about how the movement's focus has changed and what the frontiers of skepticism should be.

Kendrick Crosby Frazier is a science writer and editor of Skeptical Inquirer magazine for over 30 years. He is also a former editor of Science News, author or editor of ten books, and a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

]]>
Sun, 01 Sep 2013 10:00:46 -040005E53284-C688-48C0-98E6-408A8D034DE9NYC SkepticsKendrick Frazier, editor of Skeptical Inquirer, talks about the present, past, and future of skepticism, how the movement's focus has changed, and what the frontiers of skepticism should be. no49:26Rationally Speaking #90 - On Wine, Water, and Audiohttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs90-on-wine-water-and-audio.html
Sun, 30 Jun 2013 10:00:25 -040069C89813-EF3B-4497-B7D2-0A4CBE651F03NYC SkepticsConnoisseurship -- or snobbery, depending on your point of view, of wines, bottled water, and high-end audio equipment. Is there evidence on whether connoisseurs can really tell the difference between, for example, the $7 wine and the $700 one?no53:04Rationally Speaking #89 - Online Datinghttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs89-online-dating.html
Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:00:37 -0400A4AB4532-B515-4F38-B83C-46773C81633CNYC SkepticsM&J turn an analytical eye on the math and science of online dating sites like eHarmony and OKCupid. Also, what does cognitive psychology tell us about how this new choice context affects our happiness?no51:02Rationally Speaking #88 - Mario Livio on Brilliant Blundershttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs88-mario-livio-on-brilliant-blunders.html
Mon, 03 Jun 2013 19:00:00 -04007F214368-BE8F-4355-86DE-3DBF2F16E612NYC SkepticsAstrophysicist and author Mario Livio joins us to talk about his latest book, "Brilliant Blunders: From Darwin to Einstein - Colossal Mistakes by Great Scientists That Changed Our Understanding of Life and the Universe." no43:10Rationally Speaking #87 - Sean Carroll on Naturalismhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs87-sean-carroll-on-naturalism.html
Sun, 19 May 2013 10:00:26 -040090764D4B-9CFC-4A76-9F7D-1215AE71D675NYC SkepticsAstrophysicist Sean Carroll discusses naturalism, the philosophical viewpoint that there are no supernatural phenomena and the universe runs on scientific laws. Also, what distinguishes it from similar philosophies like physicalism and materialism.no49:04Rationally Speaking #86 - Live From NECSS With Jim Holt On Why Does the World Exist? http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs86-live-from-necss-with-jim-holt-on-why-does-the-world-exi.html
Sun, 05 May 2013 10:00:12 -0400D65EE7EF-BE20-4492-8CD9-81C560D1F2F3NYC SkepticsPhilosopher Jim Holt discusses his book "Why Does the World Exist?: An Existential Detective Story" in this live episode of Rationally Speaking, taped at the 2013 Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism in New York City.no1:05:11Rationally Speaking #85 - Live From NECSS With Michael Shermer On the Role of Science in Moralityhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show//rs85-live-from-necss-with-michael-shermer-on-the-role-of-sci.html
Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:00:18 -04006C5E15EE-873F-4E56-A766-C2A5DD585B23NYC SkepticsMassimo and Michael Shermer discuss whether science can tell us what is "moral." This discussion comes after both men have tackled the question separately in their respective books and jointly in a recent debate on the Rationally Speaking blog. no36:18Rationally Speaking #84 - Stephen Asma On the Myth of Universal Love http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs84-stephen-asma-on-the-myth-of-universal-love.html
Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:00:05 -0400592DB537-AC53-4F89-8C2C-3EBAA4274E5DNYC SkepticsPhilosopher Stephen Asma, author of "Against Fairness," talks about what he thinks is wrong with the concept of fairness -- and about certain traditional values he thinks are more important.no46:14Rationally Speaking #83 - Samuel Arbesman On The Half-Life of FactsSun, 24 Mar 2013 22:00:25 -04009F52284F-0778-4079-B518-CAF8334C7D5CNYC SkepticsSamuel Arbesman, applied mathematician and author of "The Half-Life of Facts: Why Everything We Know Has an expiration Date", joins us to talk about the hidden patterns underlying how fast our understanding of science is changing.no45:04Rationally Speaking #82 - It's Not Easy Being Greenhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs82-its-not-easy-being-green.html
Sun, 10 Mar 2013 10:00:19 -04005CBEA9C0-2A0F-4712-9063-AD9D8B9DD969NYC SkepticsShould you buy organic because it's better for the environment or fair-trade because it's better for foreign laborers? Well, It's not clear cut how much good you're accomplishing with your ethically minded purchases or whether you're doing any good at allno52:48Rationally Speaking #81 - Live! Ben Goldacre on Bad Pharmahttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs81-live-ben-goldacre-on-bad-pharma.html
Sun, 24 Feb 2013 10:00:43 -0500878F250A-A306-4FF8-9E58-476257AEEE98NYC SkepticsMedicine is broken warns Ben Goldacre, author of the Bad Science website. He talks about his new book, Bad Pharma, and how the evidence about pharmaceutical drugs gets distorted due to shoddy regulations, missing data, and the influence of drug companies.no1:03:02Rationally Speaking #80 - Dear Abbyhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs80-dear-abby.html
Sun, 10 Feb 2013 10:00:32 -0500202A9C8B-39CE-4764-B705-84F3EB830A9DNYC SkepticsThe history and philosophy of advice. How do you rationally evaluate advice and how do you give rational advice? Also, some of Dear Abby's snarkiest moments, the origins of the advice column in 1680, and some of the worst advice ever given.
no51:06Rationally Speaking #79 - Chris Mooney on The Republican War on Sciencehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs79-chris-mooney-on-the-republican-war-on-science.html
Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:00:39 -05007A9FDFAC-B10D-4050-B915-C85C3F2176F3NYC SkepticsIs there evidence to support Chris Mooney's thesis that there is something about the psychology of Republicans that makes them inclined to reject the scientific consensus on topics like evolution and climate change?no50:50Rationally Speaking #78 - Intelligence and Personality Testinghttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs78-intelligence-and-personality-testing.html
Sun, 13 Jan 2013 11:00:59 -050067742325-FD33-4933-978E-4201CAB95D05NYC SkepticsThe science and lack thereof of intelligence and personality testing. What's your IQ? Are you an ENTJ or an ISFP? What are your Openness, Conscientiousness, and Neuroticism scores? And just how seriously should you take all those scores anyway?no51:38Rationally Speaking #77 - Victoria Pitts-Taylor on Feminism and Sciencehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs77-victoria-pitts-taylor-on-feminism-and-science.html
Sun, 30 Dec 2012 10:00:27 -050054FCDC35-EC11-4C00-B64F-255FBC7D58FBNYC SkepticsSociologist Victoria Pitts discusses sociology and feminism and explains how feminists are dealing with results in neuroscience and evolutionary biology, especially regarding the question: How much inborn difference is there really between women and men?no55:06Rationally Speaking #76 - Crowdsourcing and the Wisdom of Crowdshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs76-crowdsourcing-and-the-wisdom-of-crowds.html
Sun, 16 Dec 2012 10:00:38 -0500AB81197E-A44B-4AF7-8B7E-0B5E0C6C89DDNYC SkepticsWhat are crowdsourcing and the wisdom of crowds and what makes them work? Also, is crowdsoursing ever unethical? And what are the limits to the wisdom of crowds?no50:44Rationally Speaking #75 - When Scientists Killhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs75-when-scientists-kill.html
Sun, 02 Dec 2012 18:00:46 -05001B6A38CE-2B31-4184-9984-F13F5353B177NYC SkepticsM&J discuss a recent case in Italy where scientists were sentenced to 6 years in jail for failing to warn the public of an earthquake that killed over 300 people. Was this fair? How should we decide where the boundaries of scientific accountability lie?no48:04Rationally Speaking #74 - Live! John Shook on Philosophy of Religionhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs74-live-john-shook-on-philosophy-of-religion.html
Sun, 18 Nov 2012 10:11:20 -0500B57DF791-8EFE-4FB1-BF87-82040D3CAD67NYC SkepticsLive from a Center for Inquiry symposium M&J join with John Shook to debate questions like: Should science-promoting organizations claim publicly that science is compatible with religion and is philosophy incapable of telling us anything about the world.no48:04Rationally Speaking #73 - Answers for AristotleSun, 04 Nov 2012 12:58:57 -050077EDEB92-BA1A-49D3-8516-FCBA1061559ANYC SkepticsMassimo's new book, Answers for Aristotle, whose central idea is that a combination of science and philosophy, or "Sci-Phi," is the best guide to the big questions in life, from issues of morality and justice to the meaning of love and friendship. no1:13:42Rationally Speaking #72 - Graham Priest on Paradoxes and Paraconsistent Logichttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs72-graham-priest-on-paradoxes-and-paraconsistent-logic.html
Sun, 21 Oct 2012 10:00:50 -0400CAFCF4E6-9BBA-4ABB-A539-241F21367965NYC SkepticsPhilosopher Graham Priest explains why we have to radically revise our notions of true and false, and why a statement can be simultaneously true AND false. Plus Graham's picks: "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion" and "Logic: A Very Short Introduction"no46:42Rationally Speaking #71 - On Science Fiction and Philosophy http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs71-on-science-fiction-and-philosophy.html
Sun, 07 Oct 2012 18:56:34 -0400D8D2B046-212F-4E4E-9FEF-EAFEE4A86AF7NYC SkepticsM&J discuss how science fiction functions like extended philosophical thought experiments. They also recall some of their favorite philosophically-rich science fiction and debate the potential pitfalls in using them to reach philosophical conclusions.no52:56Rationally Speaking #70 - Graham Priest on Buddhism and Other Asian Philosophieshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs70-graham-priest-on-buddhism-and-other-asian-philosophies.html
Sun, 23 Sep 2012 10:00:07 -0400EF86AA37-4876-4A09-9932-97E40F3BB347NYC SkepticsProfessor of philosophy Graham Priest offers a brief introduction to the philosophy of India, China, and Japan, and explains why he thinks it should be better known in the West. Plus Graham's pick: "The Tristan Chord: Wagner and Philosophy" no46:26Rationally Speaking #69 - James Ladyman on Metaphysicshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs69-james-ladyman-on-metaphysics.html
Sun, 09 Sep 2012 10:00:16 -04004EE46D1C-C1A6-498A-A228-06B33B6E2B2BNYC SkepticsGuest James Ladyman, discusses metaphysic. What is it, exactly, and where, in his opinion has it gone off the rails? What would a new, improved, metaphysics look like, and "Is the world real?" Plus James's pick: Roger Penrose's "The Road to Reality." no1:01:47Rationally Speaking #68 - Applied Rationalityhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs68-applied-rationality.html
Sun, 26 Aug 2012 11:00:35 -0400347A3F50-2C12-4BD9-92A9-EB4661F11823NYC SkepticsWhat has psychological research learned about "de-biasing," the challenges involved, and the de-biasing strategies Julia is implementing at her organization, the Center for Applied Rationality.no49:46Rationally Speaking #67 - Freudianism as Pseudoscience, With Assorted Comments on Masturbation and Castration...http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs67-freudianism-as-pseudoscience-with-assorted-comments-on.html
Sun, 12 Aug 2012 10:00:37 -0400D81612F0-2851-4FA0-8D41-A5465CE5A0D5NYC SkepticsThe pseudoscientific aspects of Freud's theories. Also, what philosophy of science has to say about testing theories -- and some of the similarities that Freudianism has with religion, new age mysticism, and psychic reading.no47:20Rationally Speaking #66 - Matthew Hutson on The 7 Laws of Magical Thinkinghttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs66-matthew-hutson-on-the-7-laws-of-magical-thinking.html
Sun, 29 Jul 2012 17:00:03 -04001A9FA285-50DF-4747-B9A6-88059285C063NYC SkepticsMatthew Hutson discusses some common, innate forms of superstition that affect even the most ardent skeptics, and why the human brain is predisposed to magical thinking. Plus Matthew's picks: "Believing in Magic," "SuperSense," and "The Belief Instinct" no47:56Rationally Speaking #65 - Philosophical Shock Tacticshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs65-philosophical-shock-tactics.html
Sun, 15 Jul 2012 10:00:43 -040071F1FEB2-1260-45DF-A039-3CD1663B9056NYC SkepticsWhy do philosophers sometimes argue for conclusions that are disturbing, even shocking? What can we learn from these shock tactics, the public reaction to them, and what role emotion should play in philosophy. Plus Massimo and Julia's picks.no47:42Rationally Speaking #64 - Jesse Prinz on Looking Beyond Human Nature Sun, 01 Jul 2012 12:00:23 -0400542F1566-DB48-4A62-BEA8-DE102DCEBF16NYC SkepticsGuest Jesse Prinz argues that human behavior is far more culturally determined than evolutionary psychologists would have you believe. Plus Jesse's pick: the movie "Black God, White Devil."no46:29Rationally Speaking #63 - Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs63-consilience-the-unity-of-knowledge.html
Sun, 17 Jun 2012 11:00:56 -0400EA4C6B30-624E-4CCE-81C2-734008846178NYC SkepticsWill all knowledge eventually be united? And what does that even mean, anyway? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: 10 Facts about Portable Electronics and Airplanes, MeasureOfDoubt videos, and Predictions from Philosophy? no48:44Rationally Speaking #62 - Patricia Churchland on What Neuroscience Tells Us About Moralityhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs62-patricia-churchland-on-what-neuroscience-tells-us-about.html
Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:13:53 -0400A68853C9-A2D0-414D-96A0-7DD2E36E41E3NYC SkepticsGuest Patricia Churchland discusses what philosophy has to say about neuroscience, what neuroscience has to say about philosophy, and what both of them have to say about morality. Plus Patricia's pick: "Language as a Cultural Tool"no55:13Rationally Speaking #61 - Willpowerhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs61-willpower.html
Sun, 20 May 2012 10:00:20 -040009FE3267-E7E1-4901-8E30-DDC7E043EE96NYC SkepticsThe science and philosophy of willpower: why don't we do what we know is best for us? Also, some practical solutions to the problem. Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: yourlogicalfallacyis.com and predictionbook.com.no48:22Rationally Speaking #60 - Q&A With Massimo and Juliahttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs60-qa-with-massimo-and-julia.html
Sun, 06 May 2012 10:00:27 -040094EC1BC0-7430-4B66-9111-F09FFA1F88E2NYC SkepticsM&J answer listeners' questions, including: how work of actions affect people's rationality, Bayesian vs. frequentist statistics, what is evidence, time travel, and whether a philosophically examined life is a better life.no1:03:24Rationally Speaking #59 - Live at NECSS: David Kyle Johnson on the Simulation Argumenthttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs59-live-at-necss-david-kyle-johnson-on-the-simulation-argu.html
Tue, 24 Apr 2012 21:11:25 -0400C7A54A57-6D99-4A82-981C-4E8A21D3B736NYC SkepticsGuest David Kyle Johnson makes the case that it's roughly 20% likely that we live in a computer simulation. Plus Kyle's picks: The book "How To Think About Weird Things" and the band "Ethereal Collapse."no1:09:22Rationally Speaking #58 - Intuitionhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs58-intuition.html
Sun, 08 Apr 2012 14:00:10 -04009D44AB70-63E7-4211-BF60-5F19F64D808FNYC SkepticsWhat do people mean by "intuition," where does it come from, and when can intuition beat careful reasoning? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Zombie Economics: How Dead Ideas Still Walk among Us" and "Information is Beautiful - Snake Oil?"no47:20Rationally Speaking #57 - Peer Reviewhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs57-peer-review.html
Sun, 25 Mar 2012 10:00:09 -04002FDEF4D5-B0FF-44C5-A71C-2866F6543BE6NYC SkepticsHow does the peer review process work and how did it originate? Also, what's wrong with it, how can it be fixed, and is the Internet changing the way we do research? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Download The Universe" and the game "Zendo."no48:18Rationally Speaking #56 - Howard Schneider on Science News Literacyhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs56-howard-schneider-on-science-news-literacy.html
Sun, 11 Mar 2012 10:00:54 -0400E0CCB07D-EAC9-43FD-9BA9-159BC434517ENYC SkepticsGuest Howard Schneider discusses how skeptics lay too much blame at the feet of the media for public misunderstandings and misconceptions about science. Plus Howard's pick: "Press Freedom Online - Committee to Protect Journalists"no46:45Rationally Speaking #55 - Spiritualityhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs55-spirituality.html
Sun, 26 Feb 2012 20:00:19 -0500C110DB1D-EF34-4B11-806E-5093D146D572NYC SkepticsMassimo and Julia try to pin down what people mean when they call themselves "spiritual." Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Buddhist Retreat - Why I gave up on finding my religion." and "Critical Thinking - Why Is It So Hard to Teach" no55:06Rationally Speaking #54 - The 'isms' Episodehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs54-the-isms-episode.html
Sun, 12 Feb 2012 10:00:59 -050082C9F320-9E8E-4990-8B49-7F29A7D00F59NYC SkepticsM&J look at whether the fundamental nature of the world is knowable by science alone through the lenses of a series of related philosophical positions. Plus the hosts picks: "Did Darwin Write the Origin Backwards" and "The Robot's Rebellion."no52:06Rationally Speaking #53 - Parapsychologyhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs53-parapsychology.html
Sun, 29 Jan 2012 19:34:34 -050073145791-0C36-427D-A783-B3ABC17DCB06NYC SkepticsParapsychology: what is its scientific status, what is the best evidence for it, and what can we learn from it about the practice of science in general? Plus Massimo's pick: "Be it Resolved" and Julia's un-pick: "My Little Pony."no57:13Rationally Speaking #52 - Donald Prothero on the Holocaust-Deniers' Playbookhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs52-donald-prothero-on-the-holocaust-deniers-playbook.html
Guest Donald Prothero joins us to discuss the common tactics and thinking of science deniers and the implications of this assault on science for our future. The denial of scientific realities in issues like global warming, creationism, vaccine safety, and AIDS, is growing in our society. Not only is our acceptance of scientific "inconvenient truths" under attack, but even scientists themselves have been threatened.

Donald R. Prothero is Professor of Geology at Occidental College and Lecturer in Geobiology at the California Institute of Technology. He is the author, co-author, editor, or co-editor of 25 books, over 200 scientific papers and a number of popular books including, most recenly, "Catastrophes!: Earthquakes, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, and Other Earth-Shattering Disasters" and "Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters". He is on the editorial board of Skeptic magazine and has been featured on several television documentaries, including episodes of Paleoworld (BBC), Prehistoric Monsters Revealed (History Channel), Entelodon and Hyaenodon (National Geographic Channel), and Walking with Prehistoric Beasts (BBC).

]]>
Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:25:36 -050003F8BE01-EA77-444B-BDF7-DC8BFBB680BCNYC SkepticsGuest Donald R. Prothero discusses how the denial of scientific realities threatens our future and what we can do about it. Plus Donald's pick: skepticblog.org/author/prothero/ no49:18Rationally Speaking #51 - Joseph Heath on Economics Without Illusionshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs51-joseph-heath-on-economics-without-illusions.html
Guest Joseph Heath, author of “Economics Without Illusions: Debunking the Myths of Modern Capitalism,” joins us as we turn our skeptical eyes toward the treacherous dual terrain of economics and politics. We discuss the ways in which, with his book, he attempts to raise our economic literacy and empower us with new ideas. In it, he draws on everyday examples to skewer the six favorite economic fallacies of the right, followed by impaling the six favorite fallacies of the left. Heath leaves no sacred cows untipped as he breaks down complex arguments and shows how the world really works.

Joseph Heath is the Director of the Centre for Ethics and Professor of Philosophy and Public Policy at the University of Toronto. In addition to his academic publications, he is the author of other popular books, among them, "The Rebel Sell : Why the Culture Can't Be Jammed" and "Efficient Society: Why Canada is as Close to Utopia as It Gets"

]]>
Sun, 01 Jan 2012 10:00:05 -0500F6F07E86-8BDF-43BB-B275-C528F6EA7DEBNYC SkepticsGuest Joseph Heath discusses his book "Economics Without Illusions: Debunking the Myths of Modern Capitalism." Plus Joseph's pick: "The Socialist System: The Political Economy of Communism."no46:49Rationally Speaking #50 - Neurobabblehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs50-neurobabble.html
Sun, 18 Dec 2011 10:21:54 -050033F8636E-FAF8-4521-8E61-C569F60EFC01NYC SkepticsM&J discuss neurobabble: the phenomena of people and the media coming to the wrong conclusions when confronted with neuroscience evidence. Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "hypothes.is" and "Rationality and the Reflective Mind."no53:22Rationally Speaking #49 - Eugenie C. Scott on Denialism of Climate Change and Evolutionhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs49-eugenie-c-scott-on-denialism-of-climate-change-and-evol.html
Our guest Eugenie C. Scott joins us to talk about a new initiative of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) to tackle denialism of global warming. Both evolution and global warming are “controversial issues” in the public sphere, but are not controversial in the world of science. There is some overlap between the two issues, but far more people are climate change deniers than evolution deniers. What is interesting to skeptics, however, is the similarity in the techniques that are used by both camps to promote their views. The scientific issues are presented as “not being settled,” or that there is considerable debate among scientists over the validity of claims.

Evolution and global warming opponents also demonize the opposition by accusing them of fraud or other wrong-doing. Denialists in both camps practice “anomaly mongering,” in which a small detail seemingly incompatible with either evolution or global warming is considered to undermine either evolution or climate science. Although in both cases, reputable, established science is under attack for ideological reasons, the underlying ideology differs: for creationism, the ideology of course is religious; for global warming, the ideology is political and/or economic.

Dr. Eugenie C. Scott is Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education, and sits on the Board of Advisors for the New York City Skeptics. She has written extensively on the evolution-creationism controversy and is past president of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists. Scott is the 2010 recipient of the National Academy of Science's Public Welfare Medal. She is the author of "Evolution vs Creationism" and co-editor, with Glenn Branch, of "Not in Our Classrooms: Why Intelligent Design Is Wrong for Our Schools."

]]>
Sun, 04 Dec 2011 10:00:32 -05001F54D726-340A-43DB-90B3-C580999DA56CNYC SkepticsOur guest Dr. Eugenie C. Scott discusses the National Center for Science Education's new initiative to combat denialism of the science of climate change in the public sphere. Plus Eugenie's pick: "SkepticalScience.com"no47:00Rationally Speaking #48 - Philosophical Counselinghttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs48-philosophical-counseling.html
Our guest Lou Marinoff joins us to discuss philosophical counceling, a recent trend to use philosophy as a type of talk therapy. Now, despite the provocative title of his best-selling book, “Plato, Not Prozac!: Applying Eternal Wisdom to Everyday Problems,” the idea is actually not to replace psychiatric medications with chats about the ancient Greeks. Rather, as he puts it in the introduction to the volume, you should take your medications if you really need them, but once your brain is back to a normal functionality you will likely still be faced with the same existential problems that plague most human beings. And that’s where philosophy might help.

Lou Marinoff is the Chair of the Department of Philosophy at The City College of New York and a founder of the American Philosophical Practitioners Association. His other books include "The Middle Way: Finding Happiness in a World of Extremes" and "Therapy for the Sane."

]]>
Sun, 20 Nov 2011 10:00:58 -0500946DADF9-19FC-499A-A528-C08307F062DANYC SkepticsOur guest Lou Marinoff discusses the increasingly popular practice of philosophical counseling, used in many cases instead of traditional psychotherapy. Plus, Lou's Pick: "The Philosophical Practitioner."no46:01Rationally Speaking #47 - SETIhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs47-seti.html
Sun, 06 Nov 2011 10:00:15 -0500FD1C4530-FEB1-40AD-BA4D-17560E902C91NYC SkepticsIs the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence really science? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Doctor Who and Philosophy: Bigger on the Inside (Popular Culture and Philosophy)" and "Ask a Mathematician / Ask a Physicist"no54:23Rationally Speaking #46 - The Varieties of Skepticismhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs46-the-varieties-of-skepticism.html
Sun, 23 Oct 2011 10:00:45 -0400D1D8041A-59D5-420F-9AFA-063D4D656F47NYC SkepticsNo, skeptics are not cynics and, well, perhaps some things are knowable. Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "On Bullshit" and "The Matrix as Metaphysics."no52:21Rationally Speaking #45 - Rebecca Newberger Goldstein on Spinoza, Göedl, and Theories of Everythinghttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs45-rebecca-newberger-goldstein-on-spinoza-goedl-and-theori.html
Our guest Rebecca Newberger Goldstein joins us to talk about Baruch Spinoza and Kurt Gödel, the subjects of her books "The Proof and Paradox of Kurt Gödel" and "Betraying Spinoza: The Renegade Jew who Gave Us Modernity." The topics include the idea of "Spinoza's God" and his concept of a theory of everything, their views on the limits of reason and objective reality, Gödel's theorems and its repercussions in philosophy and mathematics, and his legendary friendship with Albert Einstein. She also talks about her novels and her experience of being both a novelist and a writer of non-fiction works.

Rebecca Newberger Goldstein grew up in White Plains, New York, graduated summa cum laude from Barnard College and immediately went on to graduate work at Princeton University where she received her Ph.D. in philosophy. In 2008, she was designated a Humanist Laureate by the International Academy of Humanism, and was awarded an Honorary Doctorate by Emerson College. Currently she is a Research Associate in the Department of Psychology, Harvard University. She is the recipient of numerous awards, including the coveted MacArthur “Genius Award.” She was named Humanist of the Year 2011 by the American Humanist Association, and she was given the "Freethought Heroine Award" by the Freedom From Religion Foundation in 2011. In addition to her non-fiction works, she is the author of a number of novels, including "The Late-Summer Passion of a Woman of Mind; The Dark Sister." Her latest work is "Thirty-Six Arguments for the Existence of God."

]]>
Sun, 09 Oct 2011 10:00:45 -04006E493743-36F0-4573-A953-2313BB20F307NYC SkepticsGuest Rebecca Newberger Goldstein on betraying Spinoza, the proofs and paradoxes of Kurt Gödel, and the limits of reason and objective reality. Plus, Rebecca's pick: "The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined."no54:24Rationally Speaking #44 - Fluff that Workshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs44-fluff-that-works.html
Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:22:42 -040012AB058D-EB5E-4A71-915A-087CE28EE4D8NYC SkepticsWoo woo that works (at least some of the time.) Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Plato, Not Prozac!: Applying Eternal Wisdom to Everyday Problems" and "Don't Shoot the Dog!: The New Art of Teaching and Training."no51:02Rationally Speaking #43 - Women in Skepticismhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs43-women-in-skepticism.html
Sun, 11 Sep 2011 10:00:25 -0400EADB63F6-EC02-4E0A-A1D7-6D097A8C5FCENYC SkepticsIs there a misogyny problem in the skeptic and atheist communities? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Not For Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities" and "Paul Graham Essays".no51:03Rationally Speaking #42 - On the Limits of Reasonhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs42-on-the-limits-of-reason.html
Sun, 28 Aug 2011 10:00:16 -040039D260FB-210B-4B1A-B78E-9AEF98D71B4ANYC SkepticsIs there an intrinsic limit to humans ability to reason? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "From Technologist to Philosopher Why you should quit your technology job and get a Ph.D. in the humanities" and "Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy."no51:13Rationally Speaking #41 - Robert Zaretsky on Rousseau, Hume, and the Limits of Human Understandinghttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs41-robert-zaretsky-on-rousseau-hume-and-the-limits-of-huma.html
Imagine a time when a dispute between two philosophers was the talk of high society. That is the time that our guest, Robert Zarertsky, describes in his book "The Philosophers' Quarrel: Rousseau, Hume, and the Limits of Human Understanding." He tells the story of the short and dramatic friendship between Hume and Rousseau. Hume, who championed the progress of the sciences and arts, and Rousseau, who questioned progress, wondering whether it was just another word for moral decay and despair. He also discusses the implications their friendship may have had on the Enlightenment's conceptions of reason and human understanding.

Robert Zaretsky is a professor of French history at the University of Houston Honors College and the Department of History. He has published several books about philosophy and history of philosophy.

]]>
Sun, 14 Aug 2011 10:11:31 -0400B4B1B10B-17E6-4F47-8409-D6245B52517DNYC SkepticsGuest Robert Zaretsky discusses the quarrel between Rousseau and Hume, their different world views, and their contributions to the Enlightenment. Plus Robert's pick: "How to Live: Or A Life of Montaigne in One Question and Twenty Attempts at an Answer"no50:10Rationally Speaking #40 - Q&A With Massimo and Juliahttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs40-qa-with-massimo-and-julia.html
Sun, 31 Jul 2011 10:00:42 -04007C0DE819-A355-4DAE-96F2-ACF92C87E6F0NYC SkepticsM&J answer listeners' questions, including: teaching rationality, the ethics of profiteering, what is the purpose of our species, and is there are rational argument proving the divine origin of the bible?no1:05:11Rationally Speaking #39 - The Science and Philosophy of Free Willhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs39-the-science-and-philosophy-of-free-will.html
Sun, 17 Jul 2011 10:00:44 -0400B2283A15-6049-442D-BAAA-3083E4161B37NYC SkepticsWhat can modern neuroscience and philosophy tell us about free will and how may the two approaches complement each other. Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale" and "Fluid Concepts And Creative Analogies"no48:12Rationally Speaking #38 - Holden Karnofsky on Evidence-based Philanthropyhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs38-holden-karnofsky-on-evidence-based-philanthropy.html
Sun, 03 Jul 2011 10:00:07 -0400B1413FF4-55D7-4F6F-91A3-BE62CF3F9CCANYC SkepticsGuest Holden Karnofky, founder of "Givewell" discusses charities: how to evaluate them and whether they can or should be evaluated objectively. Plus Holden's picks: "Core Economics", "More Than Good Intentions", and "Portfolios of the Poor".no43:37Rationally Speaking #37 - The Science and Philosophy of Happinesshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs37-the-science-and-philosophy-of-happiness.html
Sun, 19 Jun 2011 10:00:04 -0400900B6804-A8D7-4B94-8C7D-1410F641624BNYC SkepticsWhat is happiness? What makes people happy, and can it be measured? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Flacking for Big Pharma" and "Discover Your Inner Economist: Use Incentives to Fall in Love, Survive Your Next Meeting, and Motivate Your Dentist"no48:31Rationally Speaking #36 - Why Should We Care About Teaching the Humanities?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs36-why-should-we-care-about-teaching-the-humanities.html
Sun, 05 Jun 2011 10:51:13 -04001C0822D0-6980-45AE-8A51-EF8770302F8ANYC SkepticsIs the ideal of a liberal education an antiquated leftover of bygones eras, or a necessary foundation for any open democratic society? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "The Philosophers' Quarrel" and Livewell.orgno50:54Rationally Speaking #35 - What is Philosophy of Science Good for?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs35-what-is-philosophy-of-science-good-for.html
In this episode we explore philosophy of science: What is it about, and should it matter to scientists? Massimo and Julia also discuss some of the most important questions in philosophy of science now, and some historical debates between leading philosophers of science, like Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper, over how science should or does work.

So is philosophy of science, as Richard Feynman famously quipped, "as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds?" Or was philosopher Daniel Dennett closer to the truth when he said, "There is no such thing as philosophy-free science, only science whose philosophical baggage is taken on-board unexamined?"

]]>
Sun, 22 May 2011 10:00:23 -040095684749-DF74-4F5C-920D-E9355BF3D8C5NYC SkepticsWhat role does philosophy play in science? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "The End of Discovery: Are We Approaching the Boundaries of the Knowable?" and "10 Important Differences Between Brains and Computers"no48:57Rationally Speaking #34 - Celebrities and the Damage They Can Dohttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs34-celebrities-and-the-damage-they-can-do.html
If the recent hoopla about the royal wedding wasn’t enough to remind you, we live in a culture of celebrity, one where famous people command our attention and often pontificate on things they know nothing about. Obvious examples include the nonsense spewed out by Prince Charles about alternative medicine, and the former model Jenny McCarthy and her dangerous notion that vaccines are harmful because they cause autism. But these, of course, are easy targets. What are we to make of Ray Kurzweil (he of Singularity fame), who recently co-authored a book with a homeopath? Or of otherwise savvy political commentator Bill Maher, who doesn’t trust vaccines or anything coming from “Western” medicine? And then there are highly respectable intellectuals, like Stephen Hawking, who write off entire fields of inquiry (philosophy, in his case), without apparently knowing much about them.

So what is going on here? Why do so many people listen to Jenny McCarthy? And why do so many bright minds go public with ridiculous notions? Is there a pattern? Can we do something to defend ourselves and the public from the celebrity attack on reason?

]]>
Sun, 08 May 2011 09:00:20 -04006246D05D-3917-4CD7-8DDD-8B9D0B32F02BNYC SkepticsCelebrities: why do so many people listen to some of the nonsense they spew. Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Science Fiction and Philosophy: From Time Travel to Superintelligence," and "Proust Was a Neuroscientist"no50:30Rationally Speaking #33 - Live at NECSS: New Dilemmas in Bioethicshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs33-live-at-necss-new-dilemmas-in-bioethics.html
Sun, 24 Apr 2011 10:00:33 -0400rationally-speaking-33-live-at-necss-new-dilemNYC SkepticsLive from NECSS, guests Jacob Appel and Jennifer Michael Hecht discuss dilemmas in bioethics.no1:04:06Rationally Speaking #32 - Value-free Science?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs32-value-free-science.html
We all think that science is about objectivity and “just the facts, ma’am.” Not so fast, philosophers, historians and sociologists of science have been arguing now for a number of decades.

To begin with, there are values embedded in the practice of science itself: testability, accuracy, generality, simplicity, and the like. Then there are the many moral dimensions of science practice, both in terms of ethical issues internal to science (fraud) and of the much broader ones affecting society at large (societal consequences of research and technological advances). Then there is the issue of diversity, where until very recently, and in many fields still today, science has largely been an affair conducted by white males. Finally, the issue of which scientific questions we should pursue and, often, fund with public money. And to complicate things further, should scientists consider the societal consequences of their research before deciding to publish?

]]>
Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:00:42 -0400rationally-speaking-32-valuefree-scienceNYC SkepticsIs science all about objective facts or are values inevitably an integral part of science? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: Slate's "What John Tierney Gets Wrong About Women Scientists" and "What Is History?" no49:58Rationally Speaking #31 - Vegetarianismhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs31-vegetarianism.html
Sun, 27 Mar 2011 09:00:16 -0400rationally-speaking-31-vegetarianismNYC SkepticsVegetarianism: what are its different forms, is it healthy, and what is the ethical case for it? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: The website "PhilPapers" and "WARNING: Physics Envy May Be Hazardous To Your Wealth!"no51:50:00Rationally Speaking #30 - Cordelia Fine on Delusions of Genderhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs30-cordelia-fine-on-delusions-of-gender.html
Cordelia Fine joins us from Melbourne, Australia to discuss her book: "Delusions of Gender: The Real Science Behind Sex Differences." Sex discrimination is supposedly a distant memory, yet popular books, magazines and even scientific articles increasingly defend inequalities by citing immutable biological differences between the male and female brain. That’s the reason, we’re told, that there are so few women in science and engineering and so few men in the laundry room — different brains are just better suited to different things. Drawing on the latest research in developmental psychology, neuroscience, and social psychology, Fine sets out to rebut these claims, showing how old myths, dressed up in new scientific finery, are helping to perpetuate the sexist status quo.

Cordelia Fine studied Experimental Psychology at Oxford University, followed by an M.Phil in Criminology at Cambridge University. She was awarded a Ph.D in Psychology from University College London. She is currently a Senior Research Associate at the Centre for Agency, Values & Ethics at Macquarie University, and an Honorary Research Fellow at the Department of Psychological Sciences at the University of Melbourne. Her previous book is "A Mind of Its Own: How Your Brain Distorts and Deceives."

]]>
Sun, 13 Mar 2011 13:32:38 -0400rationally-speaking-30-cordelia-fine-on-delusioNYC SkepticsGuest Cordelia Fine rebuts what currently passes as the science behind sex differences. Plus Cordelia's picks: "Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal."no49:27Rationally Speaking #29 - Q&A Live!http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs29-qa-live.html
Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:00:14 -0500rationally-speaking-29-qa-liveNYC SkepticsMassimo and Julia do their best to answer skeptical questions from a live audience.no1:06:44Rationally Speaking #28 - Live! How To Tell Science From Bunk http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs28-live-how-to-tell-science-from-bunk.html
Massimo and Julia sit down in front of a live audience at the Jefferson Market Library in New York City for a conversation about science, non-science, and pseudo-science. Based on Massimo's book: "Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk" the topics they cover include whether the qualitative sciences are less reliable than quantitative ones, the re-running of the tape of life, and who is smarter: physicists, biologists, or psychologists? Also, why are evolutionary psychologist so fixated on sex?

The live Q&A follows in episode 29

]]>
Sun, 13 Feb 2011 10:30:48 -0500rationally-speaking-28-live-how-to-tell-sciencNYC SkepticsMassimo and Julia sit down in front of a live audience for a conversation about science, non-science, and pseudo-science. All based on Massimo's book: "Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk."no49:15Rationally Speaking #27 - The Perihelinox Episode, With Historian Timothy Alborn on Anniversarieshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs27-the-perihelinox-episode-with-historian-timothy-alborn-o.html
In honor of our first anniversary we invited Historian Timothy Alborn to help us understand the arbitrary nature of anniversaries, both those that mark events of personal significance and those that have a wider societal impact. We chose to record this episode on a very special "holiday": Perihelinox. If you've never heard of it it's because it was recently made up by our producer, Benny Pollak, to celebrate the night of the year when the earth is closest to the sun. Nothing is sacred in this episode, from Christmas to Kwanza, to Hanukkah, to Royal Jubilees. And, the Sex Pistols?

Timothy Alborn is a historian and the Dean of Arts and Humanities at the City University of New York—Lehman College (and, incidentally, Massimo's boss). He has a Ph.D. in History of Science from Harvard University. His recent publications include "Regulated Lives: Life Assurance and British Society, 1840-1920" and "Conceiving Companies: Joint-Stock Politics in Victorian England."

]]>
Sun, 30 Jan 2011 10:00:58 -0500rationally-speaking-27-the-perihelinox-episodeNYC SkepticsGuest, historian Timothy Alborn on the arbitrariness of anniversaries and holidays. Plus Timothy's pick: "How I Killed Pluto and Why It Had It Coming."no47:17Rationally Speaking #26 - Is Anthropology Still a Science?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs26-is-anthropology-still-a-science.html
Sun, 16 Jan 2011 13:00:46 -0500rationally-speaking-26-is-anthropology-still-aNYC SkepticsShould anthropology be considered a science and what should be the role of advocacy in science. Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: The New York Times' "There Goes the Sun" and "Stories of Your Life and Others."no46:21Rationally Speaking #25 - Q&A With Massimo and Juliahttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs25-qa-with-massimo-and-julia.html
Sun, 02 Jan 2011 13:00:39 -0500rationally-speaking-25-qa-with-massimo-and-julNYC SkepticsMassimo and Julia do their best to answer listeners' skeptical questions.no1:03:05Rationally Speaking #24 - Memetics!http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs24-memetics.html
The term meme was introduced by Richard Dawkins in his 1976 bestseller "The Selfish Gene."Dawkins was trying to establish the idea that Darwinian evolution is a universal, almost logically necessary phenomenon. He couldn't, however, point to exobiological examples to reinforce the concept of universal Darwinism, so he turned to cultural evolution, renamed “ideas” as “memes” (in direct analogy with genes), and voilà, the field of memetics was born.

Despite staunch support by authors such as Susan Blackmore and Daniel Dennett, among others though, serious questions can be raised about memes and memetics as a viable concept and field of inquiry. To begin with, how is this different from classical studies of gene-culture co-evolution? Second, what, exactly are memes, i.e. what is their ontological status? Third, how do memes compete with each other, and for what resources? Is it even possible to build a functional ecology of memes, without which the statement that the most fit memes are those that spread becomes an empty tautology? Could this explain why the "Journal of Memetics" closed shop, or is it that they discovered everything there was to discover about memes?

]]>
Sun, 19 Dec 2010 13:00:10 -0500rationally-speaking-24-memeticsNYC SkepticsMemes, good science or confusing metaphor? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: The New York Times' "The Stone" and "Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality."no47:31Rationally Speaking #23 - Carol Tavris on Everybody Making Mistakes, Except Us...http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs23-carol-tavris-on-everybody-making-mistakes-except-us.html
Our guest, Carol Tavris discusses her book (co-authored with Elliot Aronson) "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts." In it they describe how our powerful cognitive dissonance engine of self-justification gives us the incredible ability to rationalize events and beliefs so that we always end up being better than average at being right. Also, how we are forced into these rationalizations by our absolute need to somehow square our most dearly held opinions of ourselves with the nasty tendency of some facts to contradict them.

Carol Tavris is a social psychologist who has tought at UCLA. She has written for many publications, including the NY Times and the LA Times. She is the author of a number of books, including "The Mismeasure of Women" and the recently re-released, "Psychobabble and Biobunk."

]]>
Sun, 05 Dec 2010 13:00:26 -0500rationally-speaking-23-carol-tavris-on-everybodNYC SkepticsGuest Carol Tavris discusses why we justify foolish beliefs, bad decisions, and hurtful acts. Plus Carol's picks: "Delusions of Gender", "Brain Storm", and "Not by Chance Alone."no48:02Rationally Speaking #22 - Steven Novella on Lies, Damned Lies, and Medical Sciencehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs22-steven-novella-on-lies-damned-lies-and-medical-science.html
Our Guest, Dr. Steven Novella discusses a recent article in The Atlantic in which researcher John Ioannidis shows that 40% of papers published in top medical journals are either wrong or make exaggerated claims (and those are the top journals!). He also discusses the difference between Science and Evidence based medicine. Also, Zombies: are they epidemiologically possible?

Steven Novella is an academic clinical neurologist at the Yale University School of Medicine. He is the host of the Skeptics Guide to the Universe podcast, author of the Neurologica blog, and co-editor of the Science Based Medicine blog.

]]>
Sun, 21 Nov 2010 13:00:21 -0500rationally-speaking-22-steven-novella-on-liesNYC SkepticsGuest Steven Novella on the state of medical research and on Science vs. Evidence based medicine. Plus Steven's pick: AMC's "The Walking Dead."no47:11Rationally Speaking #21 - Joshua Knobe on Experimental Philosophyhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs21-joshua-knobe-on-experimental-philosophy.html
Our guest, Joshua Knobe, is a philosopher interested in cognitive science, so interested, in fact, that he has contributed to establishing a whole new branch of inquiry known as experimental philosophy — and he plausibly claims that the name is not actually an oxymoron!

The idea is summarized in this way on one of the major web sites devoted to the enterprise: "Experimental philosophy, called x-phi for short, is a new philosophical movement that supplements the traditional tools of analytic philosophy with the scientific methods of cognitive science. So experimental philosophers actually go out and run systematic experiments aimed at understanding how people ordinarily think about the issues at the foundation of the philosophical discussion.”

Joshua Knobe is an assistant professor at Yale University, affiliated both with the Program in Cognitive Science and the Department of Philosophy . Most of his work involves using the kinds of experimental methods associated with cognitive science to address the kinds of questions associated with philosophy.

]]>
Sun, 07 Nov 2010 14:48:11 -0500rationally-speaking-21-joshua-knobe-on-experimeNYC SkepticsGuest Joshua Knobe on experimental philosophy. And no, not actually an oxymoron! Plus Joshua's picks: "The genealogy of morals", "You Must Go and Win: Essays", and the video "Experimental Philosophy Anthem."no45:29Rationally Speaking #20 - Q&A With Massimo and Juliahttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs20-qa-with-massimo-and-julia.html
Massimo and Julia answer listeners' questions. In this installment the topics include: can political discourse be rational, who changed M&J's opinion on something and when have they changed someone's opinion, how do they guard against biases when they debate people, the morality of bestiality, and did Samir Okasha really solve the induction problem?

]]>
Sun, 24 Oct 2010 13:00:50 -0400rationally-speaking-20-qa-with-massimo-and-julNYC SkepticsMassimo and Julia do their best to answer listeners' skeptical questions.no1:03:36Rationally Speaking #19 - Brendan Nyhan on False Beliefs that Refuse to Diehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs19-brendan-nyhan-on-false-beliefs-that-refuse-to-die.html
Ever notice how some beliefs only seem to become stronger, even as they're repeatedly debunked? For example, the belief that Barack Obama is a Muslim, or that Bush banned all stem cell research in the country. Brendan Nyhan tells about what he's learned from his research studies and his experience maintaining Spinsanity, a watchdog blog monitoring political misinformation. Is there any hope of clearing up false beliefs if denials simply make the problem worse? Brendan does offer hope, but it won't be easy.

Brendan Nyhan is a a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in Health Policy Research at the University of Michigan. He received a Ph.D. from the Department of Political Science at Duke University in May 2009. In 2011, He will join the Department of Government at Dartmouth College as an assistant professor. His research focuses on political scandal and misperceptions. He also conducts research on social networks and applied statistical methods.

]]>
Sun, 10 Oct 2010 13:00:39 -0400rationally-speaking-19-brendan-nyhan-on-false-bNYC SkepticsBrendan Nyhan on False Beliefs that Refuse to Die. Plus Brendan's picks: "True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society", "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me)", and "The Macro Polity (Cambridge Studies in Public Opinion and Political Psychology) "no30:52Rationally Speaking #18 - Evolutionary Psychologyhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs18-evolutionary-psychology.html
You’ve heard the claims: men are inclined to cheat on women because natural selection favors multiple offspring from multiple mates, especially if you don’t have to pay child support. Even rape has been suggested to be the result of natural selection in favor of “secondary mating strategies” when the primary ones fail. Welcome to evolutionary psychology, a discipline curiously situated at the interface between evolutionary science and pop psychology, where both wild and reasonable claims seem to clash against the wall of an incredible scarcity of pertinent data.

The issue is not whether it makes sense to apply evolutionary principles to the study of human behavior. Of course it does, human beings are no exception to evolution. But the devil is in the details, and the details deal with the complexities and nuances of how exactly evolutionary biologists test adaptive hypotheses, as well as with the nature of historical science itself.

]]>
Sun, 26 Sep 2010 12:00:48 -0400rationally-speaking-18-evolutionary-psychologyNYC SkepticsEvolutionary Psychology: does it makes sense to apply evolutionary principles to the study of human behavior? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "A Short Course in Intellectual Self-Defense" and "Stumbling on Happiness"no31:05Rationally Speaking #17 - Transhumanismhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/r17-transhumanism.html
What's so great about being human, anyway? The transhumanist movement -- epitomized by organizations like Humanity+ and blogs like Accelerating Future -- advocate the pursuit of technologies to fundamentally change the human condition, tinkering with our brain, bodies and genomes to make ourselves smarter, stronger, happier, and longer-lived.

But many people worry that tampering with human nature could have dire consequences for individuals and society alike. In Our Posthuman Future, political theorist Francis Fukuyama sums up the position of the bioconservatives when he warns that new technologies may "in some way cause us to lose our humanity -- that is, some essential quality that has always underpinned our sense of who we are and where we are going," he writes. In this episode of Rationally Speaking, Massimo and Julia ask, first, are the goals of transhumanism realistic, and second, are they desirable?

]]>
Sun, 12 Sep 2010 13:00:50 -0400rationally-speaking-17-transhumanismNYC SkepticsTranshumanism: What's so great about being human, anyway? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Being Wrong" and "Expert Political Judgment"no33:55Rationally Speaking #16 - Deferring to Expertshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs16-deferring-to-experts.html
At a talk he gave at TAM 8, Massimo argued that non-experts in a field aren't qualified to reject an expert consensus, such as that on anthropogenic climate change. Most recently, he has taken Jerry Coyne to task for making a philosophical argument without having the necessary expertise. This raises a number of questions: Are there fields that have no experts, or that have pretend experts? If there is a lot of disagreement among experts on a topic, should we take any individual expert's opinion less seriously? How much consensus is required before a non-expert should say, "OK, looks like this question really is settled"?

Perhaps noted expert George Carlin had it right when he said: "I have as much authority as the pope, I just don't have as many people who believe it."

]]>
Sun, 29 Aug 2010 16:00:56 -0400rationally-speaking-16-defrerring-to-expertsNYC SkepticsWhen, and how much, should we take someone's expertise into account in considering his claim? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: "Plato and a Platypus Walk into a Bar . . ." and "Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion"no34:51Rationally Speaking #15 - Q&A With Massimo and Juliahttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs15-qa-with-massimo-and-julia.html
Sun, 15 Aug 2010 13:00:20 -0400rationally-speaking-15-qa-with-massimo-and-julNYC SkepticsMassimo and Julia do their best to answer listeners' skeptical questions.no1:02:20Rationally Speaking #14 - Jennifer Michael Hecht on Science, Religion, Happiness, and Other Mythshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs14-jennifer-michael-hecht.html
Author, science historian, philosopher, and poet Jennifer Michael Hecht discusses her views on science, religion, and skepticism. She talks about her book "The Happiness Myth", showing how the very concept of happiness has changed dramatically both in time and across cultures, to the point that it may make little sense to simply ask “are you happy”? Also she makes her skeptical comments on the findings of science, for instance concerning eating and exercise habits, and how the skeptic community's reliance on science borders on religion.

Jennifer teaches at the New School in New York City. She is the author of Doubt: A History: The Great Doubters and Their Legacy of Innovation from Socrates and Jesus to Thomas Jefferson and Emily Dickinson and of The Happiness Myth: The Historical Antidote to What Isn't Working Today, among other books.

]]>
Sun, 01 Aug 2010 13:00:32 -0400rationally-speaking-14-jennifer-michael-hechtNYC SkepticsGuest Jennifer Michael Hecht discusses whether we take science too seriously and perhaps we should look more at poetry. Plus Jennifer's picks: hilobrow.com and The Best American Poetry Blog.no33:08Rationally Speaking #13 - Superstition, Is It Good For You?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs13-superstition-is-it-good-for-you.html
Is it possible that superstition is actually good for you? Well, it turns out that superstition may, at least some of the time, have beneficial effects. A paper published in 2008 in Science for example, suggests that lacking control over a situation increases people’s propensity to see illusory patterns — the implication being that the latter (a typical component of superstition) ameliorates stress when we feel that things are out of hand. Also, a recent study published in Psychological Science shows that superstition improves people’s performance on certain tasks, presumably by making them more self-confident than they would be otherwise. Add to this a recent article in Scientific American to the effect that people with Asperger’s syndrome are less likely to project agency onto life’s events (and hence tend to be less superstitious), and suddenly the skeptic might not feel so cocky about being skeptical.

Of course we're not advocating in favor of superstition on the sole ground that it may be psychologically helpful. Still, what happens when something that we devote so much time fighting against turns out not to be entirely bad after all?

]]>
Sun, 18 Jul 2010 13:00:19 -0400rationally-speaking-13-superstition-is-it-goodNYC SkepticsIn this episode we tackle superstition, It would be bad luck to talk about anything else, it is episode 13 after all! Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: Epistemelinks and How Pleasure Works.no29:48Rationally Speaking #12 - What About Thought Experiments?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs12-what-about-thought-experiments.html
Philosophers are often accused of engaging in armchair speculation, as far removed from reality as possible. The quintessential example of this practice is the thought experiment, which many scientists sneer at precisely because it doesn’t require one to get one’s hands dirty. And yet scientists have often engaged in thought experiments, some of which have marked major advances in our understanding of the world. Just consider the famous example of Galileo’s thought experiment demonstrating (rather counter intuitively) that two objects of different weight must fall at the same speed. And, perhaps more famously, Einstein's light thought experiments, which lead him to the formulation of the theory of relativity.

And then, there are the other kind, like philosopher David Chalmers' famous thought experiment about zombies and the so-called "hard problem" of consciousness. Chalmers comes up with an (admittedly ingenious) little story, and we are supposed to deduce from it the momentous conclusion that there is more than matter/energy to the universe? Still, there are plenty of good thought experiments in philosophy, beginning with the so-called trolley dilemmas meant to probe our moral intuitions.

]]>
Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:00:29 -0400rationally-speaking-12-what-about-thought-experNYC SkepticsAre thought experiments in science and philosophy just armchair speculation? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: John Norton Goodies and Great Myths of Popular Psychology.no33:58Rationally Speaking #11 - Guest Eugenie Scott on the Status of the Creationism and ID Warshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs11-guest-eugenie-scott-on-the-status-of-the-creationism-an.html
Our special guest this episode is Eugenie Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, the premiere organization fighting for sound scientific educational standards in this country, and a permanent thorn in the ass of creationists and IDers nationwide.

Genie updates us on the status of the ID and creationist wars, as well as other issues related to the intrusion of religion in science education. We also recount how, in what may be a very rare event, Genie made Massimo change his mind about something!

Genie is a physical anthropologist by training, and enjoyed an academic career at the University of Kentucky, University of Colorado and California State, before devoting her efforts full time to a constant front-line fight against irrationalism. For this she has been rewarded not just with six honorary degrees (at last count), but also with the first Stephen Jay Gould prize from the Society for the Study of Evolution, and most recently with the prestigious National Academy of Science Public Welfare Medal. She has also authored the excellent Evolution vs Creationism and co-edited (with Glenn Branch) Not in Our Classrooms: Why Intelligent Design Is Wrong for Our Schools.

]]>
Sun, 20 Jun 2010 13:00:22 -0400rationally-speaking-11-guest-eugenie-scott-on-tNYC SkepticsGuest Eugenie Scott updates us on the status of the intelligent design wars. Plus Eugenie's "un-pick": The website of the Institute for Creation Research.no37:14Rationally Speaking #10 - Nonsense on Stiltshttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs10-nonsense-on-stilts.html
The focus of this episode is Massimo's new book, Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. The book, broadly speaking, is about what philosopher Karl Popper famously called the demarcation problem: how do we tell the difference among science, non-science and pseudoscience? We explore the complex relationship among these, ranging from solid science like fundamental physics and evolutionary biology to definite pseudosciences like astrology and creationism. In the middle are the more interesting borderline areas that include the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, evolutionary psychology, and even superstring theory, to name but a few.

We also discuss other topics covered in the book, including the whole issue of expertise and Think Tanks, which plays such an important role especially in media presentations of issues such as evolution, climate change, HIV-AIDS, or the alleged connection between vaccines and autism. Julia and Massimo also address the ultimate question about pseudoscience: why do we care?

]]>
Sun, 06 Jun 2010 13:00:23 -0400rationally-speaking-10-nonsense-on-stiltsNYC SkepticsA conversation about Massimo's book: "Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk." Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: philosophypathways.com/questions and "Historians' Fallacies : Toward a Logic of Historical Thought "no31:13Rationally Speaking #9 - When Smart People Endorse Pseudosciencehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs09-when-smart-people-endorse-pseudoscience.html
Sun, 23 May 2010 13:00:31 -0400rationally-speaking-9-when-smart-people-endorseNYC SkepticsWhy is it that smart people fall for notions that are barely more defensible than astrology, or criticize well established scientific notions. Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: itisonlyatheory.blogspot.com and "The Miracle Detective"no31:53Rationally Speaking #8 - The Anthropic Principlehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs08-the-anthropic-principle.html
The Anthropic Principle (AP), in its many forms, attempts to explain why our observations of the physical universe are compatible with the life observed in it. From the Weak AP (WAP), which in one form states that "conditions that are observed in the universe must allow the observer to exist", to the Strong AP (SAP) which in one version states that: “The Universe (and hence the fundamental parameters on which it depends) must be such as to admit the creation of observers within it at some stage,” they all try to answer the question of why there is life in the universe, or why the fundamental constants are the way they are. But, do any of these principles add anything to our understanding of the ultimate question of life and the universe?

Perhaps the best answer is embedded in Martin Gardner’s sarcastic proposal of the Completely Ridiculous Anthropic Principle (CRAP): “At the instant the Omega Point is reached, life will have gained control of all matter and forces not only in a single universe, but in all universes whose existence is logically possible; life will have spread into all spatial regions in all universes which could logically exist, and will have stored an infinite amount of information, including all bits of knowledge which it is logically possible to know. And this is the end.”

]]>
Sun, 09 May 2010 13:00:47 -0400rationally-speaking-8-the-anthropic-principleNYC SkepticsIs the universe finely tuned for human life to exist? Does the Anthropic Principle add anything to our understanding of the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everyhing? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: andphilosophy.com and "House."no33:18Rationally Speaking #7 - Peter Woit discusses whether string theory is “not even wrong”http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs07-peter-woit-discusses-whether-string-theory-is-not-even.html
Sun, 25 Apr 2010 14:33:40 -0400rationally-speaking-7-peter-woit-discusses-whetNYC SkepticsColumbia Univ.mathematical physicist Peter Woit discusses whether is string theory “not even wrong.” Plus our guest's pick: the book "The End of Science."no33:13Rationally Speaking #6 - Fluffy Thinkinghttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs06-fluffy-thinking.html
Fluffy Thinking is a peculiar type of uncritical thinking that sounds sophisticated, and is next to impossible to criticize frontally both because it barely has anything to do with empirical evidence, and because it is hard to articulate what, exactly, these people are saying. These people include scientific luminaries like Freeman Dyson and Paul Davies. Also, Karen Armstrong, author of "The Case for God", and Krista Tippett, author of "Einstein's God" and host of National Public Radio's "Speaking of Faith", where scientific notions are regularly distorted and mixed up with barely intelligible mystical “insights” that are put forward as profound truths.

The question is not only whether there is anything interesting in what these people are saying, but rather the much more difficult issue of why it is that smart individuals, who make their living thinking and writing about science and philosophy, are attracted by fluffy thinking.

]]>
Sat, 10 Apr 2010 11:35:31 -0400rationally-speaking-6-fluffy-thinkingNYC Skepticsa peculiar type of uncritical thinkingno33:13Rationally Speaking #5 - Neil deGrasse Tyson and the Need for a Space Programhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs05-neil-degrasse-tyson-and-the-need-for-a-space-program.html
Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson joins Massimo and Julia to discuss the need for a space program. Many scientists (and most people in the skeptic community) simply assume that funding outlets like NASA are a good idea. But, can scientists justify the enormous expense involved, not just in terms of their personal curiosity, but as a matter of tangible and intangible benefits to society at large? Should we go back to the Moon and establish a permanent base? Is it worth the expense and likely risk to human life to attempt a mission to Mars? What is a space station for, anyway?

Dr. Tyson is an astrophysicist by training and director of the Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History in Manhattan. He is also the host of PBS's science NOW. His latest book is “The Pluto Files: The Rise and Fall of America's Favorite Planet.”

]]>
Sun, 28 Mar 2010 09:42:46 -0400rationally-speaking-5-neil-degrasse-tyson-and-tNYC SkepticsDr. Neil deGrasse Tyson discusses the Need for a Space Program. Will we ever go back to the Moon or to Mars? Plus Dr. Tyson's surprising "un-pick": The movie Avatar
no33:38Rationally Speaking #4 - The Great Atheist Debate Over the Limits of Sciencehttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs04-the-great-atheist-debate-over-the-limits-of-science.html
Sun, 14 Mar 2010 16:11:06 -0400rationally-speaking-4-the-great-atheist-debateNYC Skepticsno31:03Rationally Speaking #3 - Can History Be a Science?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs03-can-history-be-a-science.html
Sun, 28 Feb 2010 15:02:11 -0500rs03-can-history-be-a-scienceNYC SkepticsGuest: Prof. Peter Turchin of the U. of Conn. discusses whether history can be studied and understood in a scientific manner. Plus our guest's pick: Victor Lieberman's book "Strange Parallels"no28:44Rationally Speaking #2 - Love, a Skeptical Inquiryhttp://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs02-love-a-skeptical-inquiry.html
Sun, 14 Feb 2010 10:54:58 -0500rationally-speaking-2-love-a-skeptical-inquiryNYC SkepticsWill science ever really be able to explain love? Should it try? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: The book "What is this thing called science" and the NY Times article "Making College 'relevant'."no33:34Rationally Speaking #1 - Why be rational?http://www.rationallyspeakingpodcast.org/show/rs01-why-be-rational.html
Wed, 20 Jan 2010 21:11:02 -0500rationally-speaking-1-why-be-rationalNYC SkepticsAre rationality and emotion at odds, and is it ethical to promote rationality? Plus Massimo and Julia's picks: Wikipedia's List of Paradoxes and the Fallacy Files.
no32:34